Flexible Expected Shortfall Estimation Using Parametric & Non-Parametric Methods with Applications in Finance, Insurance & Climatology

Sabyasachi Guharay, KC Chang, Jie Xu
{"title":"Flexible Expected Shortfall Estimation Using Parametric & Non-Parametric Methods with Applications in Finance, Insurance & Climatology","authors":"Sabyasachi Guharay, KC Chang, Jie Xu","doi":"10.23919/fusion43075.2019.9011398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Techniques employing Data fusion concepts are regularly being used in Quantitative Risk Management (QRM) for robust analysis. In our previous work, we studied the most commonly used risk metric of interest, Value-at-Risk $(\\mathbf{VaR})$. While VaR is a commonly used risk metric, an alternative risk metric, Expected Shortfall (ES) is well known to have better theoretical properties than VaR. We extend our previous work on studying VaR to include estimating the ES also known as Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR). The standard approach of estimating CVaR involves using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) approach (denoted henceforth as classical approach). This approach involves breaking down the losses into loss severity and loss frequency assuming independence among them. In practice, this assumption may not always hold. To overcome this limitation and handle cases with both light & heavy-tail data, we propose using both a parametric & non-parametric approach. We implement Data-driven Partitioning of Frequency and Severity (DPFS) using K-means Clustering, 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. The classical approach estimates CVaR 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 CVaR estimates within 99% historical bootstrap confidence interval bounds for both simulated and realworld data. Overall, we find that the CPFS method performs better in CVaR estimation for real-world datasets than our previous studies for VaR estimation.","PeriodicalId":348881,"journal":{"name":"2019 22th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 22th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23919/fusion43075.2019.9011398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Techniques employing Data fusion concepts are regularly being used in Quantitative Risk Management (QRM) for robust analysis. In our previous work, we studied the most commonly used risk metric of interest, Value-at-Risk $(\mathbf{VaR})$. While VaR is a commonly used risk metric, an alternative risk metric, Expected Shortfall (ES) is well known to have better theoretical properties than VaR. We extend our previous work on studying VaR to include estimating the ES also known as Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR). The standard approach of estimating CVaR involves using Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) approach (denoted henceforth as classical approach). This approach involves breaking down the losses into loss severity and loss frequency assuming independence among them. In practice, this assumption may not always hold. To overcome this limitation and handle cases with both light & heavy-tail data, we propose using both a parametric & non-parametric approach. We implement Data-driven Partitioning of Frequency and Severity (DPFS) using K-means Clustering, 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. The classical approach estimates CVaR 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 CVaR estimates within 99% historical bootstrap confidence interval bounds for both simulated and realworld data. Overall, we find that the CPFS method performs better in CVaR estimation for real-world datasets than our previous studies for VaR estimation.
基于参数和非参数方法的灵活预期缺口估计及其在金融、保险和气候学中的应用
采用数据融合概念的技术经常被用于定量风险管理(QRM)中进行稳健分析。在我们之前的工作中,我们研究了最常用的风险度量,风险值$(\mathbf{VaR})$。虽然VaR是一种常用的风险度量,但作为另一种风险度量,预期不足(ES)众所周知比VaR具有更好的理论性质。我们扩展了之前研究VaR的工作,包括估计ES,也称为条件风险价值(CVaR)。估计CVaR的标准方法包括使用蒙特卡罗模拟(MCS)方法(以下简称经典方法)。这种方法包括将损失分解为损失严重程度和损失频率,假设它们之间是独立的。在实践中,这种假设可能并不总是成立。为了克服这一限制并处理轻尾和重尾数据的情况,我们建议同时使用参数和非参数方法。我们使用K-means聚类实现了数据驱动的频率和严重性划分(DPFS),以及基于copula的频率和严重性参数化建模(CPFS)。这两种方法通过合成数据的模拟实验和来自不同领域的五个公开数据集进行了验证。经典方法对80%的模拟数据集和60%的实际数据集的CVaR估计不准确。DPFS和CPFS方法在模拟和现实数据的99%的历史bootstrap置信区间范围内获得CVaR估计。总的来说,我们发现CPFS方法在真实数据集的CVaR估计中比我们之前的VaR估计研究表现得更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信