Backtestability and the ridge backtest

Carlo Acerbi, Balázs Székely
{"title":"Backtestability and the ridge backtest","authors":"Carlo Acerbi, Balázs Székely","doi":"10.3934/fmf.2023019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We propose a formal definition of backtestability for a statistical functional of a distribution: a functional is backtestable if there exists a backtest function depending only on the forecast of the functional and the related random variable, which is strictly monotonic in the former and has zero expected value for an exact forecast. We discuss the relationship with elicitability and identifiability which turn out being necessary conditions for backtestability. The variance and the expected shortfall are not backtestable for this reason. We compare (absolute) model validation in the context of hypothesis tests via backtest functions, versus (relative) model selection between competing forecasting models, via scoring functions. We define a backtest to be sharp when it is strictly monotonic with respect to the real value of the functional and not only to its forecast. This decides whether the expected value of the backtest determines also the prediction discrepancy and not only its significance. We show that the quantile backtest is not sharp and in fact it provides no information whatsoever on its true value. The expectile is also not sharp; we provide bounds for its true value, which are looser for outer confidence levels. We then introduce the notion of ridge backtests, applicable to particular non–backtestable functionals, such as the variance and the expected shortfall, which coincide with the attained minimum of the scoring function of another elicitable auxiliary functional (the mean and the value at risk, respectively). This permits approximated sharp backtests up to a small and one–sided sensitivity to the prediction of the auxiliary variable. The ridge mechanism explains why the variance has always been de–facto backtestable and allows for similar efficient ways to backtest the expected shortfall. We discuss the relevance of this result in the current debate of financial regulation (banking and insurance), where value at risk and expected shortfall are adopted as regulatory risk measures.","PeriodicalId":492180,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers of mathematical finance","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers of mathematical finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/fmf.2023019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We propose a formal definition of backtestability for a statistical functional of a distribution: a functional is backtestable if there exists a backtest function depending only on the forecast of the functional and the related random variable, which is strictly monotonic in the former and has zero expected value for an exact forecast. We discuss the relationship with elicitability and identifiability which turn out being necessary conditions for backtestability. The variance and the expected shortfall are not backtestable for this reason. We compare (absolute) model validation in the context of hypothesis tests via backtest functions, versus (relative) model selection between competing forecasting models, via scoring functions. We define a backtest to be sharp when it is strictly monotonic with respect to the real value of the functional and not only to its forecast. This decides whether the expected value of the backtest determines also the prediction discrepancy and not only its significance. We show that the quantile backtest is not sharp and in fact it provides no information whatsoever on its true value. The expectile is also not sharp; we provide bounds for its true value, which are looser for outer confidence levels. We then introduce the notion of ridge backtests, applicable to particular non–backtestable functionals, such as the variance and the expected shortfall, which coincide with the attained minimum of the scoring function of another elicitable auxiliary functional (the mean and the value at risk, respectively). This permits approximated sharp backtests up to a small and one–sided sensitivity to the prediction of the auxiliary variable. The ridge mechanism explains why the variance has always been de–facto backtestable and allows for similar efficient ways to backtest the expected shortfall. We discuss the relevance of this result in the current debate of financial regulation (banking and insurance), where value at risk and expected shortfall are adopted as regulatory risk measures.
回测性和脊回测性
给出了一个分布的统计泛函的回测性的形式化定义:如果存在一个只依赖于该泛函和相关随机变量的预测的回测函数,该函数在前者是严格单调的,在精确预测中期望值为零,则该泛函是可回测的。讨论了可溯性和可识别性的关系,它们是可溯性的必要条件。由于这个原因,差异和预期的不足是不可回溯测试的。我们通过回测函数比较假设检验背景下的(绝对)模型验证,以及通过评分函数在竞争预测模型之间的(相对)模型选择。我们定义一个回测是尖锐的,当它对函数的实值是严格单调的,而不仅仅是对它的预测。这就决定了回归检验的期望值是否也决定了预测的差异,而不仅仅是其显著性。我们表明,分位数回测并不尖锐,事实上,它没有提供任何关于其真实值的信息。靶子也不锋利;我们为它的真实值提供了界限,对于外部置信水平来说,这个界限更宽松。然后我们引入脊回测的概念,适用于特定的非回测函数,如方差和预期缺口,它们与另一个可引出的辅助函数(分别是平均值和风险值)的得分函数的最小值相吻合。这允许近似的尖锐回测,直至辅助变量预测的小而片面的敏感性。山脊机制解释了为什么方差实际上总是可回溯测试的,并允许类似的有效方法来回溯测试预期的不足。我们在当前的金融监管(银行和保险)辩论中讨论了这一结果的相关性,其中风险价值和预期不足被用作监管风险措施。
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
CiteScore
0.80
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书