Waarschuwing: oplichters actief! Oplichters bellen of e-mailen u en doen alsof ze van De Nederlandsche Bank zijn. Ga hier niet op in! Wij bellen of e-mailen u nooit. En wij vragen u nooit om gegevens of om geld over te maken. Lees meer

Why risk is so hard to measure

Working Papers

Gepubliceerd: 05 januari 2016

Door: Jon Danielsson Chen Zhou

This paper analyses the accuracy and reliability of standard techniques for risk analysis used by the financial industry as well as in regulations. We focus on the difference between value–at–risk and expected shortfall, the small sample properties of these risk measures and the impact of using an overlapping approach to construct data for longer holding periods. Overall, we find that risk forecasts are extremely uncertain at low sample sizes. By comparing the estimation uncertainty, we find that value–at–risk is superior to expected shortfall and the time-scaling approach for risk forecasts with longer holding periods is preferable to using overlapping data.
 
Keywords: Value–at–risk, expected shortfall, finite sample properties, Basel III.
JEL classifications: C10, C15, G18.

Working paper no. 494.

494 - Why risk is so hard to measure

432KB PDF
Download 494 - Why risk is so hard to measure

Ontdek gerelateerde artikelen