Differentiable neural substrates for learned and described value and risk.

Studies of human decision making emerge from two dominant traditions: learning theorists [1-3] study choices in which options are evaluated on the basis of experience, whereas behavioral economists and financial decision theorists study choices in which the key decision variables are explicitly stated. Growing behavioral evidence suggests that valuation based on these different classes of information involves separable mechanisms [4-8], but the relevant neuronal substrates are unknown. This is important for understanding the all-too-common situation in which choices must be made between alternatives that involve one or another kind of information. We studied behavior and brain activity while subjects made decisions between risky financial options, in which the associated utilities were either learned or explicitly described. We show a characteristic effect in subjects' behavior when comparing information acquired from experience with that acquired from description, suggesting that these kinds of information are treated differently. This behavioral effect was reflected neurally, and we show differential sensitivity to learned and described value and risk in brain regions commonly associated with reward processing. Our data indicate that, during decision making under risk, both behavior and the neural encoding of key decision variables are strongly influenced by the manner in which value information is presented.

Incorporating Higher Moments into Value at Risk Forecasting

Value-at-risk (VaR) forecasting generally relies on a parametric density function of portfolio returns that ignores higher moments or assumes them constant. In this paper, we propose a simple approach to forecasting of a portfolio VaR. We employ the Gram-Charlier expansion (GCE) augmenting the standard normal distribution with the first four moments, which are allowed to vary over time. In an extensive empirical study, we compare the GCE approach to other models of VaR forecasting and conclude that it provides accurate and robust estimates of the realized VaR. In spite of its simplicity, on our dataset GCE outperforms other estimates that are generated by both constant and time-varying higher-moments models.

Modeling and forecasting value-at-risk for the Portuguese stock market

The aim of this work project is to find a model that is able to accurately forecast the daily Value-at-Risk for PSI-20 Index, independently of the market conditions, in order to expand empirical literature for the Portuguese stock market. Hence, two subsamples, representing more and less volatile periods, were modeled through unconditional and conditional volatility models (because it is what drives returns). All models were evaluated through Kupiec’s and Christoffersen’s tests, by comparing forecasts with actual results. Using an out-of-sample of 204 observations, it was found that a GARCH(1,1) is an accurate model for our purposes.

Stress testing a complement of value-a-risk.

Rapport de stage (maîtrise en finance mathématique et computationnelle)

A comparison of extreme value theory approaches for determining value at risk

This paper compares a number of different extreme value models for determining the value at risk (VaR) of three LIFFE futures contracts. A semi-nonparametric approach is also proposed, where the tail events are modeled using the generalised Pareto distribution, and normal market conditions are captured by the empirical distribution function. The value at risk estimates from this approach are compared with those of standard nonparametric extreme value tail estimation approaches, with a small sample bias-corrected extreme value approach, and with those calculated from bootstrapping the unconditional density and bootstrapping from a GARCH(1,1) model. The results indicate that, for a holdout sample, the proposed semi-nonparametric extreme value approach yields superior results to other methods, but the small sample tail index technique is also accurate.

The effect of asymmetries on stock index return value-at-risk estimates

It is widely accepted that equity return volatility increases more following negative shocks rather than positive shocks. However, much of value-at-risk (VaR) analysis relies on the assumption that returns are normally distributed (a symmetric distribution). This article considers the effect of asymmetries on the evaluation and accuracy of VaR by comparing estimates based on various models.

Non-smooth optimization methods for computation of the conditional value-at-risk and portfolio optimization

We examine numerical performance of various methods of calculation of the Conditional Value-at-risk (CVaR), and portfolio optimization with respect to this risk measure. We concentrate on the method proposed by Rockafellar and Uryasev in (Rockafellar, R.T. and Uryasev, S., 2000, Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk, 2, 21-41), which converts this problem to that of convex optimization. We compare the use of linear programming techniques against a non-smooth optimization method of the discrete gradient, and establish the supremacy of the latter. We show that non-smooth optimization can be used efficiently for large portfolio optimization, and also examine parallel execution of this method on computer clusters.

A survey of value-at-risk and its role in the banking industry

This paper discusses the various aspects of Value-at-Risk (VaR) and the VaR-based risk management process as it pertains to the banking industry. Since its inception in the 1990’s, VaR has become the industry standard by which market risk is both measured and managed by financial institutions today. However, there has been much debate regarding VaR’s validity and the extent of its role within the banking industry. Yet, now that it is an integral part of the regulatory framework, establishing VaR’s legitimacy is more important than ever. Therefore, this paper examines the recent literature on VaR’s use as a market risk management tool within the banking environment in an attempt to clarify some of the more contentious issues which have been raised by researchers. The discussion begins by highlighting the underlying theory on which VaR is based, specific aspects which have proven controversial and its use from a regulatory perspective. The focus then turns to what little literature exists on the subject of VaR and asset returns in an attempt to provide some direction for future research.