Multinomial VaR backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall
Yen Lok () and
Alexander J. McNeil
Journal of Banking & Finance, 2018, vol. 88, issue C, 393-407
Under the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book, capital charges are based on the coherent Expected Shortfall (ES) risk measure, which is sensitive to tail risk. We argue that backtesting of the forecasting models used to derive ES can be based on a multinomial test of Value-at-Risk (VaR) exceptions at several levels. Using simulation experiments with heavy-tailed distributions and GARCH volatility models, we design a statistical procedure to show that at least four VaR levels are required to obtain tests for misspecified trading book models that are more powerful than single-level (or even two-level) binomial exception tests. A traffic-light system for model approval is proposed and illustrated with three real-data examples spanning the 2008 financial crisis.
Keywords: Backtesting; Banking regulation; Expected shortfall; Financial risk management; Statistical test; Value-at-Risk (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Working Paper: Multinomial VaR Backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall (2016)
Working Paper: Multinomial var backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall (2016)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jbfina:v:88:y:2018:i:c:p:393-407
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Banking & Finance is currently edited by Ike Mathur
More articles in Journal of Banking & Finance from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dana Niculescu ().