The Impact of the Choice of Risk and Dispersion Measure on Procyclicality
Marcel Br\"autigam and
Papers from arXiv.org
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.
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ban and nep-rmg
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.00529 Latest version (application/pdf)
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:arx:papers:2001.00529
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().