Forecasting High‐Frequency Risk Measures

This article proposes intraday high‐frequency risk (HFR) measures for market risk in the case of irregularly spaced high‐frequency data. In this context, we distinguish three concepts of value‐at‐risk (VaR): the total VaR, the marginal (or per‐time‐unit) VaR and the instantaneous VaR. Since the market risk is obviously related to the duration between two consecutive trades, these measures are completed with a duration risk measure, i.e. the time‐at‐risk (TaR). We propose a forecasting procedure for VaR and TaR for each trade or other market microstructure event. Subsequently, we perform a backtesting procedure specifically designed to assess the validity of the VaR and TaR forecasts on irregularly spaced data. The performance of the HFR measure is illustrated in an empirical application for two stocks (Bank of America and Microsoft) and an exchange‐traded fund based on Standard & Poor's 500 index. We show that the intraday HFR forecasts capture accurately the volatility and duration dynamics for these three assets. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Role of High‐Frequency Intra‐daily Data,Daily Range and Implied Volatility in Multi‐period Value‐at‐Risk Forecasting

This paper assesses the informational content of alternative realized volatility estimators, daily range and implied volatility in multi‐period out‐of‐sample Value‐at‐Risk (VaR) predictions. We use the recently proposed Realized GARCH model combined with the skewed Student's t distribution for the innovations process and a Monte Carlo simulation approach in order to produce the multi‐period VaR estimates. Our empirical findings, based on the S&P 500 stock index, indicate that almost all realized and implied volatility measures can produce statistically and regulatory precise VaR forecasts across forecasting horizons, with the implied volatility being especially accurate in monthly VaR forecasts. The daily range produces inferior forecasting results in terms of regulatory accuracy and Basel II compliance. However, robust realized volatility measures, which are immune against microstructure noise bias or price jumps, generate superior VaR estimates in terms of capital efficiency, as they minimize the opportunity cost of capital and the Basel II regulatory capital. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Forecasting value‐at‐risk with a parsimonious portfolio spillover GARCH (PS‐GARCH) model

Accurate modelling of volatility (or risk) is important in finance, particularly as it relates to the modelling and forecasting of value‐at‐risk (VaR) thresholds. As financial applications typically deal with a portfolio of assets and risk, there are several multivariate GARCH models which specify the risk of one asset as depending on its own past as well as the past behaviour of other assets. Multivariate effects, whereby the risk of a given asset depends on the previous risk of any other asset, are termed spillover effects. In this paper we analyse the importance of considering spillover effects when forecasting financial volatility. The forecasting performance of the VARMA‐GARCH model of Ling and McAleer (2003), which includes spillover effects from all assets, the CCC model of Bollerslev (1990), which includes no spillovers, and a new Portfolio Spillover GARCH (PS‐GARCH) model, which accommodates aggregate spillovers parsimoniously and hence avoids the so‐called curse of dimensionality, are compared using a VaR example for a portfolio containing four international stock market indices. The empirical results suggest that spillover effects are statistically significant. However, the VaR threshold forecasts are generally found to be insensitive to the inclusion of spillover effects in any of the multivariate models considered. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Backtesting Value‐at‐Risk: A Generalized Markov Test

Testing the validity of value‐at‐risk (VaR) forecasts, or backtesting, is an integral part of modern market risk management and regulation. This is often done by applying independence and coverage tests developed by Christoffersen (International Economic Review, 1998; 39(4), 841–862) to so‐called hit‐sequences derived from VaR forecasts and realized losses. However, as pointed out in the literature, these aforementioned tests suffer from low rejection frequencies, or (empirical) power when applied to hit‐sequences derived from simulations matching empirical stylized characteristics of return data. One key observation of the studies is that higher‐order dependence in the hit‐sequences may cause the observed lower power performance. We propose to generalize the backtest framework for VaR forecasts, by extending the original first‐order dependence of Christoffersen to allow for a higher‐ or kth‐order dependence. We provide closed‐form expressions for the tests as well as asymptotic theory. Not only do the generalized tests have power against kth‐order dependence by definition, but also included simulations indicate improved power performance when replicating the aforementioned studies. Further, included simulations show much improved size properties of one of the suggested tests. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

On a dynamic mixture GARCH model

This paper proposes a new mixture GARCH model with a dynamic mixture proportion. The mixture Gaussian distribution of the error can vary from time to time. The Bayesian Information Criterion and the EM algorithm are used to estimate the number of parameters as well as the model parameters and their standard errors. The new model is applied to the S&P500 Index and Hang Seng Index and compared with GARCH models with Gaussian error and Student's t error. The result shows that the IGARCH effect in these index returns could be the result of the mixture of one stationary volatility component with another non‐stationary volatility component. The VaR based on the new model performs better than traditional GARCH‐based VaRs, especially in unstable stock markets. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

International Evidence on GFC‐Robust Forecasts for Risk Management under the Basel Accord

A risk management strategy designed to be robust to the global financial crisis (GFC), in the sense of selecting a value‐at‐risk (VaR) forecast that combines the forecasts of different VaR models, was proposed by McAleer and coworkers in 2010. The robust forecast is based on the median of the point VaR forecasts of a set of conditional volatility models. Such a risk management strategy is robust to the GFC in the sense that, while maintaining the same risk management strategy before, during and after a financial crisis, it will lead to comparatively low daily capital charges and violation penalties for the entire period. This paper presents evidence to support the claim that the median point forecast of VaR is generally GFC robust. We investigate the performance of a variety of single and combined VaR forecasts in terms of daily capital requirements and violation penalties under the Basel II Accord, as well as other criteria. In the empirical analysis we choose several major indexes, namely French CAC, German DAX, US Dow Jones, UK FTSE100, Hong Kong Hang Seng, Spanish Ibex 35, Japanese Nikkei, Swiss SMI and US S&P 500. The GARCH, EGARCH, GJR and RiskMetrics models as well as several other strategies, are used in the comparison. Backtesting is performed on each of these indexes using the Basel II Accord regulations for 2008–10 to examine the performance of the median strategy in terms of the number of violations and daily capital charges, among other criteria. The median is shown to be a profitable and safe strategy for risk management, both in calm and turbulent periods, as it provides a reasonable number of violations and daily capital charges. The median also performs well when both total losses and the asymmetric linear tick loss function are considered Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Daily FX Volatility Forecasts: Can the GARCH(1,1) Model be Beaten using High‐Frequency Data?

Volatility forecasting remains an active area of research with no current consensus as to the model that provides the most accurate forecasts, though Hansen and Lunde (2005) have argued that in the context of daily exchange rate returns nothing can beat a GARCH(1,1) model. This paper extends that line of research by utilizing intra‐day data and obtaining daily volatility forecasts from a range of models based upon the higher‐frequency data. The volatility forecasts are appraised using four different measures of ‘true’ volatility and further evaluated using regression tests of predictive power, forecast encompassing and forecast combination. Our results show that the daily GARCH(1,1) model is largely inferior to all other models, whereas the intra‐day unadjusted‐data GARCH(1,1) model generally provides superior forecasts compared to all other models. Hence, while it appears that a daily GARCH(1,1) model can be beaten in obtaining accurate daily volatility forecasts, an intra‐day GARCH(1,1) model cannot be. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Forecasting volatility of emerging stock markets: linear versus non‐linear GARCH models

ARCH and GARCH models are substantially used for modelling volatility of time series data. It is proven by many studies that if variables are significantly skewed, linear versions of these models are not sufficient for both explaining the past volatility and forecasting the future volatility. In this paper, we compare the linear(GARCH(1,1)) and non‐linear(EGARCH) versions of GARCH model by using the monthly stock market returns of seven emerging countries from February 1988 to December 1996. We find that for emerging stock markets GARCH(1,1) model performs better than EGARCH model, even if stock market return series display skewed distributions. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Exponentially Smoothing the Skewed Laplace Distribution for Value‐at‐Risk Forecasting

Value‐at‐risk (VaR) is a standard measure of market risk in financial markets. This paper proposes a novel, adaptive and efficient method to forecast both volatility and VaR. Extending existing exponential smoothing as well as GARCH formulations, the method is motivated from an asymmetric Laplace distribution, where skewness and heavy tails in return distributions, and their potentially time‐varying nature, are taken into account. The proposed volatility equation also involves novel time‐varying dynamics. Back‐testing results illustrate that the proposed method offers a viable, and more accurate, though conservative, improvement in forecasting VaR compared to a range of popular alternatives. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Selection of Value‐at‐Risk models

Value‐at‐Risk (VaR) is widely used as a tool for measuring the market risk of asset portfolios. However, alternative VaR implementations are known to yield fairly different VaR forecasts. Hence, every use of VaR requires choosing among alternative forecasting models. This paper undertakes two case studies in model selection, for the S&P 500 index and India's NSE‐50 index, at the 95% and 99% levels. We employ a two‐stage model selection procedure. In the first stage we test a class of models for statistical accuracy. If multiple models survive rejection with the tests, we perform a second stage filtering of the surviving models using subjective loss functions. This two‐stage model selection procedure does prove to be useful in choosing a VaR model, while only incompletely addressing the problem. These case studies give us some evidence about the strengths and limitations of present knowledge on estimation and testing for VaR. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Bias in the estimation of non‐linear transformations of the integrated variance of returns

Volatility models such as GARCH, although misspecified with respect to the data‐generating process, may well generate volatility forecasts that are unconditionally unbiased. In other words, they generate variance forecasts that, on average, are equal to the integrated variance. However, many applications in finance require a measure of return volatility that is a non‐linear function of the variance of returns, rather than of the variance itself. Even if a volatility model generates forecasts of the integrated variance that are unbiased, non‐linear transformations of these forecasts will be biased estimators of the same non‐linear transformations of the integrated variance because of Jensen's inequality. In this paper, we derive an analytical approximation for the unconditional bias of estimators of non‐linear transformations of the integrated variance. This bias is a function of the volatility of the forecast variance and the volatility of the integrated variance, and depends on the concavity of the non‐linear transformation. In order to estimate the volatility of the unobserved integrated variance, we employ recent results from the realized volatility literature. As an illustration, we estimate the unconditional bias for both in‐sample and out‐of‐sample forecasts of three non‐linear transformations of the integrated standard deviation of returns for three exchange rate return series, where a GARCH(1, 1) model is used to forecast the integrated variance. Our estimation results suggest that, in practice, the bias can be substantial. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Single‐index and portfolio models for forecasting value‐at‐risk thresholds

The variance of a portfolio can be forecast using a single index model or the covariance matrix of the portfolio. Using univariate and multivariate conditional volatility models, this paper evaluates the performance of the single index and portfolio models in forecasting value‐at‐risk (VaR) thresholds of a portfolio. Likelihood ratio tests of unconditional coverage, independence and conditional coverage of the VaR forecasts suggest that the single‐index model leads to excessive and often serially dependent violations, while the portfolio model leads to too few violations. The single‐index model also leads to lower daily Basel Accord capital charges. The univariate models which display correct conditional coverage lead to higher capital charges than models which lead to too many violations. Overall, the Basel Accord penalties appear to be too lenient and favour models which have too many violations. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of parameter and model uncertainty on market risk predictions from GARCH‐type models

We study the effect of parameter and model uncertainty on the left‐tail of predictive densities and in particular on VaR forecasts. To this end, we evaluate the predictive performance of several GARCH‐type models estimated via Bayesian and maximum likelihood techniques. In addition to individual models, several combination methods are considered, such as Bayesian model averaging and (censored) optimal pooling for linear, log or beta linear pools. Daily returns for a set of stock market indexes are predicted over about 13 years from the early 2000s. We find that Bayesian predictive densities improve the VaR backtest at the 1% risk level for single models and for linear and log pools. We also find that the robust VaR backtest exhibited by linear and log pools is better than the backtest of single models at the 5% risk level. Finally, the equally weighted linear pool of Bayesian predictives tends to be the best VaR forecaster in a set of 42 forecasting techniques.     

Out‐of‐sample volatility prediction: A new mixed‐frequency approach

This paper proposes a new mixed‐frequency approach to predict stock return volatilities out‐of‐sample. Based on the strategy of momentum of predictability (MoP), our mixed‐frequency approach has a model switching mechanism that switches between generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH)‐class models that only use low‐frequency data and heterogeneous autoregressive models of realized volatility (HAR‐RV)‐type that only use high‐frequency data. The MoP model simply selects a forecast with relatively good past performance between the GARCH‐class and HAR‐RV‐type forecasts. The model confidence set (MCS) test shows that our MoP strategy significantly outperforms the competing models, which is robust to various settings. The MoP test shows that a relatively good recent past forecasting performance of the GARCH‐class or HAR‐RV‐type model is significantly associated with a relatively good current performance, supporting the success of the MoP model.     

Forecasting high‐frequency financial data with the ARFIMA–ARCH model

Financial data series are often described as exhibiting two non‐standard time series features. First, variance often changes over time, with alternating phases of high and low volatility. Such behaviour is well captured by ARCH models. Second, long memory may cause a slower decay of the autocorrelation function than would be implied by ARMA models. Fractionally integrated models have been offered as explanations. Recently, the ARFIMA–ARCH model class has been suggested as a way of coping with both phenomena simultaneously. For estimation we implement the bias correction of Cox and Reid ( 1987 ). For daily data on the Swiss 1‐month Euromarket interest rate during the period 1986–1989, the ARFIMA–ARCH (5,d,2/4) model with non‐integer d is selected by AIC. Model‐based out‐of‐sample forecasts for the mean are better than predictions based on conditionally homoscedastic white noise only for longer horizons (τ > 40). Regarding volatility forecasts, however, the selected ARFIMA–ARCH models dominate. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Does Information Help Intra‐Day Volatility Forecasts?

While much research related to forecasting return volatility does so in a univariate setting, this paper includes proxies for information flows to forecast intra‐day volatility for the IBEX 35 futures market. The belief is that volume or the number of transactions conveys important information about the market that may be useful in forecasting. Our results suggest that augmenting a variety of GARCH‐type models with these proxies lead to improved forecasts across a range of intra‐day frequencies. Furthermore, our results present an interesting picture whereby the PARCH model generally performs well at the highest frequencies and shorter forecasting horizons, whereas the component model performs well at lower frequencies and longer forecast horizons. Both models attempt to capture long memory; the PARCH model allows for exponential decay in the autocorrelation function, while the component model captures trend volatility, which dominates over a longer horizon. These characteristics are likely to explain the success of each model. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Bayesian Forecasting for Financial Risk Management,Pre and Post the Global Financial Crisis

Value‐at‐risk (VaR) forecasting via a computational Bayesian framework is considered. A range of parametric models is compared, including standard, threshold nonlinear and Markov switching generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) specifications, plus standard and nonlinear stochastic volatility models, most considering four error probability distributions: Gaussian, Student‐t, skewed‐t and generalized error distribution. Adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo methods are employed in estimation and forecasting. A portfolio of four Asia–Pacific stock markets is considered. Two forecasting periods are evaluated in light of the recent global financial crisis. Results reveal that: (i) GARCH models outperformed stochastic volatility models in almost all cases; (ii) asymmetric volatility models were clearly favoured pre crisis, while at the 1% level during and post crisis, for a 1‐day horizon, models with skewed‐t errors ranked best, while integrated GARCH models were favoured at the 5% level; (iii) all models forecast VaR less accurately and anti‐conservatively post crisis. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Daily volatility forecasts: reassessing the performance of GARCH models

Volatility plays a key role in asset and portfolio management and derivatives pricing. As such, accurate measures and good forecasts of volatility are crucial for the implementation and evaluation of asset and derivative pricing models in addition to trading and hedging strategies. However, whilst GARCH models are able to capture the observed clustering effect in asset price volatility in‐sample, they appear to provide relatively poor out‐of‐sample forecasts. Recent research has suggested that this relative failure of GARCH models arises not from a failure of the model but a failure to specify correctly the ‘true volatility’ measure against which forecasting performance is measured. It is argued that the standard approach of using ex post daily squared returns as the measure of ‘true volatility’ includes a large noisy component. An alternative measure for ‘true volatility’ has therefore been suggested, based upon the cumulative squared returns from intra‐day data. This paper implements that technique and reports that, in a dataset of 17 daily exchange rate series, the GARCH model outperforms smoothing and moving average techniques which have been previously identified as providing superior volatility forecasts. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Backtesting Aggregate Risk

This paper proposes the implementation of a VaR backtesting procedure able to overcome the subadditivity property failure of value‐at‐risk (VaR). More precisely, we propose the implementation of a multivariate portmanteau test statistic of Ljung–Box type applied to hits collected from several trading desks or divisions at once. Simulation \exercises illustrate that this method is testing for aggregate risk, accurately accounting both for diversification (negative hit cross‐correlation) and contagion/risk spillovers (positive hit cross‐correlation). An application using profit and loss and VaR data collected for two international major banks illustrates how our proposed backtesting procedure performs in a realistic environment. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An outlier robust GARCH model and forecasting volatility of exchange rate returns

Since volatility is perceived as an explicit measure of risk, financial economists have long been concerned with accurate measures and forecasts of future volatility and, undoubtedly, the Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity (GARCH) model has been widely used for doing so. It appears, however, from some empirical studies that the GARCH model tends to provide poor volatility forecasts in the presence of additive outliers. To overcome the forecasting limitation, this paper proposes a robust GARCH model (RGARCH) using least absolute deviation estimation and introduces a valuable estimation method from a practical point of view. Extensive Monte Carlo experiments substantiate our conjectures. As the magnitude of the outliers increases, the one‐step‐ahead forecasting performance of the RGARCH model has a more significant improvement in two forecast evaluation criteria over both the standard GARCH and random walk models. Strong evidence in favour of the RGARCH model over other competitive models is based on empirical application. By using a sample of two daily exchange rate series, we find that the out‐of‐sample volatility forecasts of the RGARCH model are apparently superior to those of other competitive models. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.