IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v32y2016i4p1385-1402.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Variational Bayes for assessment of dynamic quantile forecasts

Author

Listed:
  • Gerlach, Richard
  • Abeywardana, Sachin

Abstract

Recently, various Bayes factor analogues of frequentist tests for the accuracy of dynamic quantile forecasts have been developed. However, in evaluating the marginal likelihoods involved, either inappropriate assumptions have been made, or pre-packaged multivariate adaptive quadrature methods have been employed, without an accuracy assessment. This paper develops variational Bayes methods for estimating lower bounds for these marginal likelihoods efficiently. This facilitates a more accurate version of one existing Bayesian test, and allows for the development of a new test based on the probit regression model. The size and power properties of the proposed methods are examined via a simulation study, illustrating favourable comparisons with existing testing methods. The accuracy and speed of the VB methods are also assessed. An empirical study illustrates the sensible performance and applicability of the proposed methods, relative to standard tests, for assessing the adequacy of a range of forecast models for the Value at Risk (VaR) in several financial market data series.

Suggested Citation

  • Gerlach, Richard & Abeywardana, Sachin, 2016. "Variational Bayes for assessment of dynamic quantile forecasts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 1385-1402.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:32:y:2016:i:4:p:1385-1402
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2016.06.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207016300681
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2016.06.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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. Gaglianone, Wagner Piazza & Lima, Luiz Renato & Linton, Oliver & Smith, Daniel R., 2011. "Evaluating Value-at-Risk Models via Quantile Regression," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 29(1), pages 150-160.
    3. Paul H. Kupiec, 1995. "Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk measurement models," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 95-24, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    4. 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.
    5. Robert F. Engle & Simone Manganelli, 2004. "CAViaR: Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk by Regression Quantiles," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 367-381, October.
    6. Jeremy Berkowitz & Peter Christoffersen & Denis Pelletier, 2011. "Evaluating Value-at-Risk Models with Desk-Level Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(12), pages 2213-2227, December.
    7. Smith, Michael & Kohn, Robert, 1996. "Nonparametric regression using Bayesian variable selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 317-343, December.
    8. Christoffersen, Peter F, 1998. "Evaluating Interval Forecasts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 841-862, November.
    9. Glosten, Lawrence R & Jagannathan, Ravi & Runkle, David E, 1993. "On the Relation between the Expected Value and the Volatility of the Nominal Excess Return on Stocks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(5), pages 1779-1801, December.
    10. Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Chen, Cathy W.S. & Gerlach, Richard & So, Mike K.P., 2006. "Comparison of nonnested asymmetric heteroskedastic models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 2164-2178, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Ormerod, J. T. & Wand, M. P., 2010. "Explaining Variational Approximations," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 64(2), pages 140-153.
    15. Chen, Qian & Gerlach, Richard H., 2013. "The two-sided Weibull distribution and forecasting financial tail risk," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 527-540.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nieto, Maria Rosa & Ruiz, Esther, 2016. "Frontiers in VaR forecasting and backtesting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 475-501.
    2. Vica Tendenan & Richard Gerlach & Chao Wang, 2020. "Tail risk forecasting using Bayesian realized EGARCH models," Papers 2008.05147, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    3. Chao Wang & Qian Chen & Richard Gerlach, 2017. "Bayesian Realized-GARCH Models for Financial Tail Risk Forecasting Incorporating Two-sided Weibull Distribution," Papers 1707.03715, arXiv.org.
    4. Benjamin R. Auer & Benjamin Mögel, 2016. "How Accurate are Modern Value-at-Risk Estimators Derived from Extreme Value Theory?," CESifo Working Paper Series 6288, CESifo.
    5. Chen, Qian & Gerlach, Richard H., 2013. "The two-sided Weibull distribution and forecasting financial tail risk," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 527-540.
    6. Vincenzo Candila & Giampiero M. Gallo & Lea Petrella, 2020. "Mixed--frequency quantile regressions to forecast Value--at--Risk and Expected Shortfall," Papers 2011.00552, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    7. Benjamin Mögel & Benjamin R. Auer, 2018. "How accurate are modern Value-at-Risk estimators derived from extreme value theory?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 50(4), pages 979-1030, May.
    8. Chen, Cathy W.S. & Gerlach, Richard & Hwang, Bruce B.K. & McAleer, Michael, 2012. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk using nonlinear regression quantiles and the intra-day range," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 557-574.
    9. Erik Kole & Thijs Markwat & Anne Opschoor & Dick van Dijk, 2017. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk under Temporal and Portfolio Aggregation," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 649-677.
    10. Gerlach, Richard & Wang, Chao, 2020. "Semi-parametric dynamic asymmetric Laplace models for tail risk forecasting, incorporating realized measures," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 489-506.
    11. Timo Dimitriadis & Xiaochun Liu & Julie Schnaitmann, 2020. "Encompassing Tests for Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Multi-Step Forecasts based on Inference on the Boundary," Papers 2009.07341, arXiv.org.
    12. Richard Gerlach & Chao Wang, 2016. "Bayesian Semi-parametric Realized-CARE Models for Tail Risk Forecasting Incorporating Realized Measures," Papers 1612.08488, arXiv.org.
    13. 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.
    14. Richard Gerlach & Chao Wang, 2016. "Forecasting risk via realized GARCH, incorporating the realized range," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 501-511, April.
    15. Wu, Qi & Yan, Xing, 2019. "Capturing deep tail risk via sequential learning of quantile dynamics," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Liu, Xiaochun & Luger, Richard, 2015. "Unfolded GARCH models," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 186-217.
    17. Wilson Calmon & Eduardo Ferioli & Davi Lettieri & Johann Soares & Adrian Pizzinga, 2021. "An Extensive Comparison of Some Well‐Established Value at Risk Methods," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(1), pages 148-166, April.
    18. Xiaochun Liu, 2017. "An integrated macro‐financial risk‐based approach to the stressed capital requirement," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 86-98, September.
    19. Slim, Skander & Koubaa, Yosra & BenSaïda, Ahmed, 2017. "Value-at-Risk under Lévy GARCH models: Evidence from global stock markets," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 30-53.
    20. Marius Galabe Sampid & Haslifah M Hasim & Hongsheng Dai, 2018. "Refining value-at-risk estimates using a Bayesian Markov-switching GJR-GARCH copula-EVT model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-33, June.

    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:eee:intfor:v:32:y:2016:i:4:p:1385-1402. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    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.