假设违约(lgd)模型风险对监管资本的影响评估:贝叶斯方法

Yang Liu
{"title":"假设违约(lgd)模型风险对监管资本的影响评估:贝叶斯方法","authors":"Yang Liu","doi":"10.2495/RISK180101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The model is wrong!” so it is determined. All of the estimated output using the model becomes un-reliable immediately. And so is every other result calculated using the unreliable output. So what is the impact of the model being “wrong” in the later calculations? To address this question, this paper presents a Bayesian approach that provides a quantitative assessment for the impact on downstream results calculated using the unreliable estimates. Section 1 details the practical challenge in the financial industry and discusses why this is important. Section 2 starts the discussion with a description of the overall framework for this Bayesian approach, introducing and defining each individual component. Then Sections 3 and 4 carry on discussing the prior and likelihood distributions, respectively. Section 5 then obtains the target posterior distribution by applying the Bayesian posterior update using obtained prior and likelihood results. Then conditioning on value of the unreliable estimate already in place in the portfolio, the density distribution obtained can be used to update the output of the “wrong” model and assess the impact in further calculations. This approach bridges the practitioners’ initial expectations with the model performance and provides an intuitive quantitative assessment for the impact in the follow-up calculations which are largely affected by the unreliable estimate. The presented approach is the first in literature to raise the concern of uncertain impact caused by “wrong” models and propose a solution. The pioneer demonstration using uncertainty in the loss given default (LGD) models as an example and assessing the impact on the then calculated regulatory capital provides a timely assessment tool for model risk management in the current banking industry. Note that the abuse of the word wrong in quotation marks is an exaggeration of the uncertainty involved, in practice, impact analysis could be requested at any level of uncertainty.","PeriodicalId":21504,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis XI","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF LOSS GIVEN DEFAULT (LGD) MODELS’ RISK ON REGULATORY CAPITAL: A BAYESIAN APPROACH\",\"authors\":\"Yang Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.2495/RISK180101\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The model is wrong!” so it is determined. All of the estimated output using the model becomes un-reliable immediately. And so is every other result calculated using the unreliable output. So what is the impact of the model being “wrong” in the later calculations? To address this question, this paper presents a Bayesian approach that provides a quantitative assessment for the impact on downstream results calculated using the unreliable estimates. Section 1 details the practical challenge in the financial industry and discusses why this is important. Section 2 starts the discussion with a description of the overall framework for this Bayesian approach, introducing and defining each individual component. Then Sections 3 and 4 carry on discussing the prior and likelihood distributions, respectively. Section 5 then obtains the target posterior distribution by applying the Bayesian posterior update using obtained prior and likelihood results. Then conditioning on value of the unreliable estimate already in place in the portfolio, the density distribution obtained can be used to update the output of the “wrong” model and assess the impact in further calculations. This approach bridges the practitioners’ initial expectations with the model performance and provides an intuitive quantitative assessment for the impact in the follow-up calculations which are largely affected by the unreliable estimate. The presented approach is the first in literature to raise the concern of uncertain impact caused by “wrong” models and propose a solution. The pioneer demonstration using uncertainty in the loss given default (LGD) models as an example and assessing the impact on the then calculated regulatory capital provides a timely assessment tool for model risk management in the current banking industry. Note that the abuse of the word wrong in quotation marks is an exaggeration of the uncertainty involved, in practice, impact analysis could be requested at any level of uncertainty.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risk Analysis XI\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risk Analysis XI\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2495/RISK180101\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis XI","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2495/RISK180101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这个模型是错误的!这就决定了。使用该模型的所有估计输出立即变得不可靠。使用不可靠输出计算的其他结果也是如此。那么,模型在后来的计算中出现“错误”的影响是什么呢?为了解决这个问题,本文提出了一种贝叶斯方法,该方法为使用不可靠估计计算的下游结果的影响提供了定量评估。第1节详细介绍了金融行业的实际挑战,并讨论了为什么这很重要。第2节首先描述了这种贝叶斯方法的总体框架,介绍并定义了每个单独的组件。然后第3节和第4节分别讨论先验分布和似然分布。然后第5节利用得到的先验和似然结果应用贝叶斯后验更新得到目标后验分布。然后,根据投资组合中已经存在的不可靠估计的值,得到的密度分布可以用来更新“错误”模型的输出,并评估其在进一步计算中的影响。这种方法将从业者的最初期望与模型性能联系起来,并为后续计算中的影响提供了直观的定量评估,这些计算很大程度上受到不可靠估计的影响。本文提出的方法在文献中首次提出了对“错误”模型造成的不确定影响的关注,并提出了解决方案。先锋论证以违约损失(LGD)模型中的不确定性为例,评估对当时计算的监管资本的影响,为当前银行业的模型风险管理提供了及时的评估工具。请注意,滥用引号中的“错误”一词是对所涉及的不确定性的夸大,在实践中,可以要求在任何不确定性级别上进行影响分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF LOSS GIVEN DEFAULT (LGD) MODELS’ RISK ON REGULATORY CAPITAL: A BAYESIAN APPROACH
The model is wrong!” so it is determined. All of the estimated output using the model becomes un-reliable immediately. And so is every other result calculated using the unreliable output. So what is the impact of the model being “wrong” in the later calculations? To address this question, this paper presents a Bayesian approach that provides a quantitative assessment for the impact on downstream results calculated using the unreliable estimates. Section 1 details the practical challenge in the financial industry and discusses why this is important. Section 2 starts the discussion with a description of the overall framework for this Bayesian approach, introducing and defining each individual component. Then Sections 3 and 4 carry on discussing the prior and likelihood distributions, respectively. Section 5 then obtains the target posterior distribution by applying the Bayesian posterior update using obtained prior and likelihood results. Then conditioning on value of the unreliable estimate already in place in the portfolio, the density distribution obtained can be used to update the output of the “wrong” model and assess the impact in further calculations. This approach bridges the practitioners’ initial expectations with the model performance and provides an intuitive quantitative assessment for the impact in the follow-up calculations which are largely affected by the unreliable estimate. The presented approach is the first in literature to raise the concern of uncertain impact caused by “wrong” models and propose a solution. The pioneer demonstration using uncertainty in the loss given default (LGD) models as an example and assessing the impact on the then calculated regulatory capital provides a timely assessment tool for model risk management in the current banking industry. Note that the abuse of the word wrong in quotation marks is an exaggeration of the uncertainty involved, in practice, impact analysis could be requested at any level of uncertainty.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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