(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Partially Censored Posterior for Robust and Efficient Risk Evaluation
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20190057.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Partially Censored Posterior for Robust and Efficient Risk Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Agnieszka Borowska

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Lennart Hoogerheide

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Siem Jan Koopman

    (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

  • Herman van Dijk

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

Abstract

A novel approach to inference for a specific region of the predictive distribution is introduced. An important domain of application is accurate prediction of financial risk measures, where the area of interest is the left tail of the predictive density of logreturns. Our proposed approach originates from the Bayesian approach to parameter estimation and time series forecasting, however it is robust in the sense that it provides a more accurate estimation of the predictive density in the region of interest in case of misspecification. The first main contribution of the paper is the novel concept of the Partially Censored Posterior (PCP), where the set of model parameters is partitioned into two subsets: for the first subset of parameters we consider the standard marginal posterior, for the second subset of parameters (that are particularly related to the region of interest) we consider the conditional censored posterior. The censoring means that observations outside the region of interest are censored: for those observations only the probability of being outside the region of interest matters. This quasi-Bayesian approach yields more precise parameter estimation than a fully censored posterior for all parameters, and has more focus on the region of interest than a standard Bayesian approach. The second main contribution is that we introduce two novel methods for computationally efficient simulation: Conditional MitISEM, a Markov chain Monte Carlo method to simulate model parameters from the Partially Censored Posterior, and PCP-QERMit, an Importance Sampling method that is introduced to further decrease the numerical standard errors of the Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall estimators. The third main contribution is that we consider the effect of using a time-varying boundary of the region of interest, which may provide more information about the left tail of the distribution of the standardized innovations. Extensive simulation and empirical studies show the ability of the introduced method to outperform standard approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnieszka Borowska & Lennart Hoogerheide & Siem Jan Koopman & Herman van Dijk, 2019. "Partially Censored Posterior for Robust and Efficient Risk Evaluation," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-057/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20190057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/19057.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoogerheide, Lennart & van Dijk, Herman K., 2010. "Bayesian forecasting of Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall using adaptive importance sampling," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 231-247, April.
    2. Geweke, John, 1989. "Bayesian Inference in Econometric Models Using Monte Carlo Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1317-1339, November.
    3. Hansen, Bruce E, 1994. "Autoregressive Conditional Density Estimation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(3), pages 705-730, August.
    4. Anne Opschoor & Dick van Dijk & Michel van der Wel, 2017. "Combining density forecasts using focused scoring rules," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(7), pages 1298-1313, November.
    5. Berkowitz, Jeremy, 2001. "Testing Density Forecasts, with Applications to Risk Management," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(4), pages 465-474, October.
    6. Alexander J. McNeil & Rüdiger Frey & Paul Embrechts, 2015. "Quantitative Risk Management: Concepts, Techniques and Tools Revised edition," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 2, number 10496.
    7. Baştürk, N. & Borowska, A. & Grassi, S. & Hoogerheide, L. & van Dijk, H.K., 2019. "Forecast density combinations of dynamic models and data driven portfolio strategies," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 170-186.
    8. Geweke, John & Amisano, Gianni, 2010. "Comparing and evaluating Bayesian predictive distributions of asset returns," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 216-230, April.
    9. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    10. Ausin, Maria Concepcion & Galeano, Pedro, 2007. "Bayesian estimation of the Gaussian mixture GARCH model," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 2636-2652, February.
    11. Philippe Artzner & Freddy Delbaen & Jean‐Marc Eber & David Heath, 1999. "Coherent Measures of Risk," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-228, July.
    12. McNeil, Alexander J. & Frey, Rudiger, 2000. "Estimation of tail-related risk measures for heteroscedastic financial time series: an extreme value approach," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(3-4), pages 271-300, November.
    13. Hall, Stephen G. & Mitchell, James, 2007. "Combining density forecasts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-13.
    14. Hoogerheide, Lennart & Opschoor, Anne & van Dijk, Herman K., 2012. "A class of adaptive importance sampling weighted EM algorithms for efficient and robust posterior and predictive simulation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 171(2), pages 101-120.
    15. Engle, Robert F & Ng, Victor K, 1993. "Measuring and Testing the Impact of News on Volatility," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(5), pages 1749-1778, December.
    16. Amisano, Gianni & Giacomini, Raffaella, 2007. "Comparing Density Forecasts via Weighted Likelihood Ratio Tests," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 25, pages 177-190, April.
    17. Diks, Cees & Panchenko, Valentyn & van Dijk, Dick, 2011. "Likelihood-based scoring rules for comparing density forecasts in tails," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 215-230, August.
    18. John Geweke & Gianni Amisano, 2012. "Prediction with Misspecified Models," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 482-486, May.
    19. Drew Creal & Siem Jan Koopman & André Lucas, 2013. "Generalized Autoregressive Score Models With Applications," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 777-795, August.
    20. repec:hal:journl:peer-00834423 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Engle, Robert F, 1982. "Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 987-1007, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexandra-Maria Chiper, 2023. "Financial Risk Optimisation Methods: A Survey," Review of Economic and Business Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 31, pages 155-168, June.
    2. Lee, Cheol Woo & Kang, Kyu Ho, 2023. "Estimating and testing skewness in a stochastic volatility model," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 445-467.
    3. Yuru Sun & Worapree Maneesoonthorn & Ruben Loaiza-Maya & Gael M. Martin, 2023. "Optimal probabilistic forecasts for risk management," Papers 2303.01651, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Petropoulos, Fotios & Apiletti, Daniele & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios & Babai, Mohamed Zied & Barrow, Devon K. & Ben Taieb, Souhaib & Bergmeir, Christoph & Bessa, Ricardo J. & Bijak, Jakub & Boylan, Joh, 2022. "Forecasting: theory and practice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 705-871.
      • Fotios Petropoulos & Daniele Apiletti & Vassilios Assimakopoulos & Mohamed Zied Babai & Devon K. Barrow & Souhaib Ben Taieb & Christoph Bergmeir & Ricardo J. Bessa & Jakub Bijak & John E. Boylan & Jet, 2020. "Forecasting: theory and practice," Papers 2012.03854, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    2. Gordy, Michael B. & McNeil, Alexander J., 2020. "Spectral backtests of forecast distributions with application to risk management," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    3. Ardia, David & Bluteau, Keven & Boudt, Kris & Catania, Leopoldo, 2018. "Forecasting risk with Markov-switching GARCH models:A large-scale performance study," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 733-747.
    4. David Happersberger & Harald Lohre & Ingmar Nolte, 2020. "Estimating portfolio risk for tail risk protection strategies," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 26(4), pages 1107-1146, September.
    5. Torben G. Andersen & Tim Bollerslev & Peter F. Christoffersen & Francis X. Diebold, 2005. "Volatility Forecasting," PIER Working Paper Archive 05-011, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    6. Chen, Qian & Gerlach, Richard & Lu, Zudi, 2012. "Bayesian Value-at-Risk and expected shortfall forecasting via the asymmetric Laplace distribution," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3498-3516.
    7. Gaglianone, Wagner Piazza & Marins, Jaqueline Terra Moura, 2017. "Evaluation of exchange rate point and density forecasts: An application to Brazil," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 707-728.
    8. Agnieszka Borowska & Lennart Hoogerheide & Siem Jan Koopman, 2019. "Bayesian Risk Forecasting for Long Horizons," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-018/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    9. Andersen, Torben G. & Bollerslev, Tim & Christoffersen, Peter F. & Diebold, Francis X., 2006. "Volatility and Correlation Forecasting," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 15, pages 777-878, Elsevier.
    10. Anne Opschoor & Dick van Dijk & Michel van der Wel, 2014. "Improving Density Forecasts and Value-at-Risk Estimates by Combining Densities," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-090/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    11. Knut Are Aastveit & Francesco Ravazzolo & Herman K. van Dijk, 2018. "Combined Density Nowcasting in an Uncertain Economic Environment," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 131-145, January.
    12. Halkos, George E. & Tsirivis, Apostolos S., 2019. "Effective energy commodity risk management: Econometric modeling of price volatility," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 234-250.
    13. Kapetanios, G. & Mitchell, J. & Price, S. & Fawcett, N., 2015. "Generalised density forecast combinations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 150-165.
    14. Benjamin Beckers & Helmut Herwartz & Moritz Seidel, 2017. "Risk forecasting in (T)GARCH models with uncorrelated dependent innovations," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 121-137, January.
    15. Cees Diks & Valentyn Panchenko & Dick van Dijk, 2008. "Partial Likelihood-Based Scoring Rules for Evaluating Density Forecasts in Tails," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 08-050/4, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Lin, Chu-Hsiung & Changchien, Chang-Cheng & Kao, Tzu-Chuan & Kao, Wei-Shun, 2014. "High-order moments and extreme value approach for value-at-risk," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 421-434.
    17. Diks, Cees & Panchenko, Valentyn & van Dijk, Dick, 2011. "Likelihood-based scoring rules for comparing density forecasts in tails," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 215-230, August.
    18. Martin, Gael M. & Loaiza-Maya, Rubén & Maneesoonthorn, Worapree & Frazier, David T. & Ramírez-Hassan, Andrés, 2022. "Optimal probabilistic forecasts: When do they work?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 384-406.
    19. Enrique Molina‐Muñoz & Andrés Mora‐Valencia & Javier Perote, 2021. "Backtesting expected shortfall for world stock index ETFs with extreme value theory and Gram–Charlier mixtures," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 4163-4189, July.
    20. Weron, Rafał, 2014. "Electricity price forecasting: A review of the state-of-the-art with a look into the future," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1030-1081.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bayesian inference; censored likelihood; censored posterior; partially censored posterior; misspecification; density forecasting; Markov chain Monte Carlo; importance sampling; mixture of Student's t; Value-at-Risk; Expected Shortfall;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • C58 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Financial Econometrics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20190057. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.