The Impact of the Choice of Risk and Dispersion Measure on Procyclicality

Procyclicality of historical risk measure estimation means that one tends to over-estimate future risk when present realized volatility is high and vice versa under-estimate future risk when the realized volatility is low. Out of it different questions arise, relevant for applications and theory: What are the factors which affect the degree of procyclicality? More specifically, how does the choice of risk measure affect this? How does this behaviour vary with the choice of realized volatility estimator? How do different underlying model assumptions influence the pro-cyclical effect? In this paper we consider three different well-known risk measures (Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, Expectile), the r-th absolute centred sample moment, for any integer $r>0$, as realized volatility estimator (this includes the sample variance and the sample mean absolute deviation around the sample mean) and two models (either an iid model or an augmented GARCH($p$,$q$) model). We show that the strength of procyclicality depends on these three factors, the choice of risk measure, the realized volatility estimator and the model considered. But, no matter the choices, the procyclicality will always be present.