IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cauewp/7411.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Exact inference in diagnosing value-at-risk estimates: A Monte Carlo device

Author

Listed:
  • Herwartz, Helmut

Abstract

In this note a Monte Carlo approach is suggested to determine critical values for diagnostic tests of Value-at-Risk models that rely on binary random variables. Monte Carlo testing offers exact significance levels in finite samples. Conditional on exact critical values the dynamic quantile test suggested by Engle and Manganelli (2004) turns out more powerful than a recently proposed Portmanteau type test (Hurlin and Tokpavi 2006).

Suggested Citation

  • Herwartz, Helmut, 2008. "Exact inference in diagnosing value-at-risk estimates: A Monte Carlo device," Economics Working Papers 2008-16, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cauewp:7411
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/27671/1/EWP-2008-16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2006. "Monte Carlo tests with nuisance parameters: A general approach to finite-sample inference and nonstandard asymptotics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 443-477, August.
    2. Christophe Hurlin & Sessi Tokpavi, 2006. "Backtesting VaR Accuracy: A New Simple Test," Working Papers halshs-00068384, HAL.
    3. 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.
    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. Herwartz, Helmut, 2009. "Exact inference in diagnosing Value-at-Risk estimates -- A Monte Carlo device," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 160-162, June.
    2. Jeremy Berkowitz & Peter Christoffersen & Denis Pelletier, 2011. "Evaluating Value-at-Risk Models with Desk-Level Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(12), pages 2213-2227, December.
    3. Bertrand Candelon & Gilbert Colletaz & Christophe Hurlin & Sessi Tokpavi, 2011. "Backtesting Value-at-Risk: A GMM Duration-Based Test," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 314-343, Spring.
    4. Elena-Ivona DUMITRESCU, 2011. "Backesting Value-at-Risk: From DQ (Dynamic Quantile) to DB (Dynamic Binary) Tests," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 262, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.
    5. Thiele, Stephen, 2019. "Detecting underestimates of risk in VaR models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 12-20.
    6. Bertrand Candelon & Marc Joëts & Sessi Tokpavi, 2012. "Testing for crude oil markets globalization during extreme price movements," Post-Print hal-01411687, HAL.
    7. Nikola Radivojevic & Milena Cvjetkovic & Saša Stepanov, 2016. "The new hybrid value at risk approach based on the extreme value theory," Estudios de Economia, University of Chile, Department of Economics, vol. 43(1 Year 20), pages 29-52, June.
    8. Aramonte, Sirio & Giudice Rodriguez, Marius del & Wu, Jason, 2013. "Dynamic factor Value-at-Risk for large heteroskedastic portfolios," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4299-4309.
    9. Araújo Santos, P. & Fraga Alves, M.I., 2012. "A new class of independence tests for interval forecasts evaluation," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3366-3380.
    10. Sullivan Hu'e & Christophe Hurlin & Yang Lu, 2024. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall: Accounting for both duration and severity with bivariate orthogonal polynomials," Papers 2405.02012, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    11. Frésard, Laurent & Pérignon, Christophe & Wilhelmsson, Anders, 2011. "The pernicious effects of contaminated data in risk management," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 2569-2583, October.
    12. Marc Joëts, 2012. "Energy price transmissions during extreme movements," Working Papers hal-04141047, HAL.
    13. Joëts, Marc, 2014. "Energy price transmissions during extreme movements," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 392-399.
    14. Elena-Ivona Dumitrescu & Christophe Hurlin & Vinson Pham, 2012. "Backtesting Value-at-Risk: From Dynamic Quantile to Dynamic Binary Tests," Finance, Presses universitaires de Grenoble, vol. 33(1), pages 79-112.
    15. repec:ipg:wpaper:28 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. repec:ipg:wpaper:2013-028 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Leccadito, Arturo & Boffelli, Simona & Urga, Giovanni, 2014. "Evaluating the accuracy of value-at-risk forecasts: New multilevel tests," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 206-216.
    18. Candelon, Bertrand & Joëts, Marc & Tokpavi, Sessi, 2013. "Testing for Granger causality in distribution tails: An application to oil markets integration," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 276-285.
    19. Nieto, Maria Rosa & Ruiz, Esther, 2016. "Frontiers in VaR forecasting and backtesting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 475-501.
    20. Ziggel, Daniel & Berens, Tobias & Weiß, Gregor N.F. & Wied, Dominik, 2014. "A new set of improved Value-at-Risk backtests," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 29-41.
    21. Jean-Paul Laurent & Hassan Omidi Firouzi, 2022. "Market Risk and Volatility Weighted Historical Simulation After Basel III," Working Papers hal-03679434, HAL.
    22. Eric Ghysels & Leonardo Iania & Jonas Striaukas, 2018. "Quantile-based Inflation Risk Models," Working Paper Research 349, National Bank of Belgium.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Value-at-Risk; Monte Carlo test;

    JEL classification:

    • G28 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes

    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:zbw:cauewp:7411. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vakiede.html .

    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.