IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2203.08224.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Predicting Value at Risk for Cryptocurrencies With Generalized Random Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Konstantin Gorgen
  • Jonas Meirer
  • Melanie Schienle

Abstract

We study the prediction of Value at Risk (VaR) for cryptocurrencies. In contrast to classic assets, returns of cryptocurrencies are often highly volatile and characterized by large fluctuations around single events. Analyzing a comprehensive set of 105 major cryptocurrencies, we show that Generalized Random Forests (GRF) (Athey et al., 2019) adapted to quantile prediction have superior performance over other established methods such as quantile regression, GARCH-type and CAViaR models. This advantage is especially pronounced in unstable times and for classes of highly-volatile cryptocurrencies. Furthermore, we identify important predictors during such times and show their influence on forecasting over time. Moreover, a comprehensive simulation study also indicates that the GRF methodology is at least on par with existing methods in VaR predictions for standard types of financial returns and clearly superior in the cryptocurrency setup.

Suggested Citation

  • Konstantin Gorgen & Jonas Meirer & Melanie Schienle, 2022. "Predicting Value at Risk for Cryptocurrencies With Generalized Random Forests," Papers 2203.08224, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2203.08224
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.08224
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giacomini, Raffaella & Komunjer, Ivana, 2005. "Evaluation and Combination of Conditional Quantile Forecasts," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 416-431, October.
    2. Giacomini, Raffaella & White, Halbert, 2003. "Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt5jk0j5jh, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    3. Gkillas, Konstantinos & Katsiampa, Paraskevi, 2018. "An application of extreme value theory to cryptocurrencies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 109-111.
    4. Platanakis, Emmanouil & Urquhart, Andrew, 2019. "Portfolio management with cryptocurrencies: The role of estimation risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 76-80.
    5. Paul H. Kupiec, 1995. "Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk measurement models," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 95-24, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    6. Refk Selmi & Aviral Kumar Tiwari & Shawkat Hammoudeh, 2018. "Efficiency or speculation? A dynamic analysis of the Bitcoin market," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(4), pages 2037-2046.
    7. Alla Petukhina & Simon Trimborn & Wolfgang Karl Härdle & Hermann Elendner, 2021. "Investing with cryptocurrencies – evaluating their potential for portfolio allocation strategies," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(11), pages 1825-1853, November.
    8. Kwiatkowski, Denis & Phillips, Peter C. B. & Schmidt, Peter & Shin, Yongcheol, 1992. "Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root : How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1-3), pages 159-178.
    9. Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
    10. Cathy Yi-Hsuan Chen & Christian M. Hafner, 2019. "Sentiment-Induced Bubbles in the Cryptocurrency Market," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-12, April.
    11. Christian M Hafner, 2020. "Testing for Bubbles in Cryptocurrencies with Time-Varying Volatility," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 233-249.
    12. Trimborn, Simon & Härdle, Wolfgang Karl, 2018. "CRIX an Index for cryptocurrencies," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 107-122.
    13. Jeffrey Chu & Stephen Chan & Saralees Nadarajah & Joerg Osterrieder, 2017. "GARCH Modelling of Cryptocurrencies," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, October.
    14. Engle, Robert F & Manganelli, Simone, 1999. "CAViaR: Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk by Regression Quantiles," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt06m3d6nv, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    15. Pafka, Szilárd & Kondor, Imre, 2001. "Evaluating the RiskMetrics methodology in measuring volatility and Value-at-Risk in financial markets," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 299(1), pages 305-310.
    16. Christoffersen, Peter F, 1998. "Evaluating Interval Forecasts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 841-862, November.
    17. Raffaella Giacomini & Halbert White, 2006. "Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1545-1578, November.
    18. Robert F. Engle & Simone Manganelli, 2004. "CAViaR: Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk by Regression Quantiles," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 367-381, October.
    19. Chaim, Pedro & Laurini, Márcio P., 2019. "Is Bitcoin a bubble?," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 517(C), pages 222-232.
    20. Baur, Dirk G. & Hong, KiHoon & Lee, Adrian D., 2018. "Bitcoin: Medium of exchange or speculative assets?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 177-189.
    21. Carlos Trucíos & Aviral K. Tiwari & Faisal Alqahtani, 2020. "Value-at-risk and expected shortfall in cryptocurrencies’ portfolio: a vine copula–based approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(24), pages 2580-2593, May.
    22. Cheah, Eng-Tuck & Fry, John, 2015. "Speculative bubbles in Bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of Bitcoin," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 32-36.
    23. Eric Ghysels & Giang Nguyen, 2019. "Price Discovery of a Speculative Asset: Evidence from a Bitcoin Exchange," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-26, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Timo Dimitriadis & Xiaochun Liu & Julie Schnaitmann, 2020. "Encompassing Tests for Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Multi-Step Forecasts based on Inference on the Boundary," Papers 2009.07341, arXiv.org.
    2. Liu, Wei & Semeyutin, Artur & Lau, Chi Keung Marco & Gozgor, Giray, 2020. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk of Cryptocurrencies with RiskMetrics type models," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Erik Kole & Thijs Markwat & Anne Opschoor & Dick van Dijk, 2017. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk under Temporal and Portfolio Aggregation," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 649-677.
    4. Laporta, Alessandro G. & Merlo, Luca & Petrella, Lea, 2018. "Selection of Value at Risk Models for Energy Commodities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 628-643.
    5. André A. P. Santos & Francisco J. Nogales & Esther Ruiz, 2013. "Comparing Univariate and Multivariate Models to Forecast Portfolio Value-at-Risk," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 400-441, March.
    6. Nieto, Maria Rosa & Ruiz, Esther, 2016. "Frontiers in VaR forecasting and backtesting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 475-501.
    7. Laura Garcia‐Jorcano & Alfonso Novales, 2021. "Volatility specifications versus probability distributions in VaR forecasting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(2), pages 189-212, March.
    8. Diks, Cees & Fang, Hao, 2020. "Comparing density forecasts in a risk management context," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 531-551.
    9. López-Martín, Carmen & Arguedas-Sanz, Raquel & Muela, Sonia Benito, 2022. "A cryptocurrency empirical study focused on evaluating their distribution functions," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 387-407.
    10. Troster, Victor & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Macedo, Demian Nicolás, 2019. "Bitcoin returns and risk: A general GARCH and GAS analysis," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 187-193.
    11. Trucíos, Carlos, 2019. "Forecasting Bitcoin risk measures: A robust approach," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 836-847.
    12. Ardia, David & Bluteau, Keven & Rüede, Maxime, 2019. "Regime changes in Bitcoin GARCH volatility dynamics," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 266-271.
    13. Gaglianone, Wagner Piazza & Marins, Jaqueline Terra Moura, 2017. "Evaluation of exchange rate point and density forecasts: An application to Brazil," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 707-728.
    14. Hua, Jian & Manzan, Sebastiano, 2013. "Forecasting the return distribution using high-frequency volatility measures," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4381-4403.
    15. Faria, Adriano & Almeida, Caio, 2018. "A hybrid spline-based parametric model for the yield curve," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 72-94.
    16. Chen, Cathy W.S. & Gerlach, Richard & Hwang, Bruce B.K. & McAleer, Michael, 2012. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk using nonlinear regression quantiles and the intra-day range," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 557-574.
    17. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    18. Ñíguez, Trino-Manuel & Perote, Javier, 2017. "Moments expansion densities for quantifying financial risk," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 53-69.
    19. Jian, Zhihong & Li, Xupei & Zhu, Zhican, 2022. "Extreme risk transmission channels between the stock index futures and spot markets: Evidence from China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    20. Gourieroux, C. & Jasiak, J., 2008. "Dynamic quantile models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 198-205, November.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2203.08224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.