Robust Estimation of Value-at-Risk through Distribution-Free and Parametric Approaches Using the Joint Severity and Frequency Model: Applications in Financial, Actuarial, and Natural Calamities Domains

Sabyasachi Guharay, Chang Kc and Jie Xu
Additional contact information
Sabyasachi Guharay: Systems Engineering & Operations Research, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA
Chang Kc: Systems Engineering & Operations Research, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA
Jie Xu: Systems Engineering & Operations Research, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA

Risks, 2017, vol. 5, issue 3, 1-30

Abstract: Value-at-Risk (VaR) is a well-accepted risk metric in modern quantitative risk management (QRM). The classical Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) approach, denoted henceforth as the classical approach, assumes the independence of loss severity and loss frequency. In practice, this assumption does not always hold true. Through mathematical analyses, we show that the classical approach is prone to significant biases when the independence assumption is violated. This is also corroborated by studying both simulated and real-world datasets. To overcome the limitations and to more accurately estimate VaR, we develop and implement the following two approaches for VaR estimation: the data-driven partitioning of frequency and severity (DPFS) using clustering analysis, and copula-based parametric modeling of frequency and severity (CPFS). These two approaches are verified using simulation experiments on synthetic data and validated on five publicly available datasets from diverse domains; namely, the financial indices data of Standard & Poor’s 500 and the Dow Jones industrial average, chemical loss spills as tracked by the US Coast Guard, Australian automobile accidents, and US hurricane losses. The classical approach estimates VaR inaccurately for 80% of the simulated data sets and for 60% of the real-world data sets studied in this work. Both the DPFS and the CPFS methodologies attain VaR estimates within 99% bootstrap confidence interval bounds for both simulated and real-world data. We provide a process flowchart for risk practitioners describing the steps for using the DPFS versus the CPFS methodology for VaR estimation in real-world loss datasets.

Keywords: risk management; simulation; copula; loss severity modeling; Value-at-Risk (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C G0 G1 G2 G3 K2 M2 M4 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/5/3/41/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/5/3/41/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:5:y:2017:i:3:p:41-:d:105953

Access Statistics for this article

Risks is currently edited by Mr. Claude Zhang

More articles in Risks from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().