Applying VaR to REITs: A comparison of alternative methods
AbstractThis study employs five methods to calculate the VaR of twelve REITs portfolios and evaluates the accuracy of these methods. Firstly, we find that the VaR varies among individual portfolios. The Hotel REITs has consistently the largest VaR. The low-leveraging portfolio tends to have the largest VaR measured by the parametric methods, while the high leveraging portfolio has the largest VaR calculated by the non-parametric methods. Secondly, each method performs differently at different confidence levels, and no method dominates the others. At the 95% confidence level, the EWMA method performs relatively well. The EQWMA and the two non-parametric methods perform equivalently and slightly overestimate VaRs. The EQWMAT method ranks the bottom and significantly overestimates VaRs for all portfolios. At the 99% confidence level, the EQWMA method performs the best. The EQWMAT and the two non-parametric methods perform equivalently and may overestimate VaR for all portfolios. The EWMA method turns out to be the worst and tends to underestimate the VaR. These findings may provide more insights for institutional real estate investors.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Review of Financial Economics.
Volume (Year): 18 (2009)
Issue (Month): 2 (April)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620170
Value-at-Risk Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) Risk management;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- repec:fip:fedhpr:y:1996:i:may:p:334-362 is not listed on IDEAS
- 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.).
- Darryll Hendricks, 1996. "Evaluation of value-at-risk models using historical data," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, issue Apr, pages 39-69.
- Chris Brooks & Gita Persand, 2000. "Value at Risk and Market Crashes," ICMA Centre Discussion Papers in Finance icma-dp2000-01, Henley Business School, Reading University.
- Vlaar, Peter J. G., 2000. "Value at risk models for Dutch bond portfolios," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(7), pages 1131-1154, July.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wendy Shamier).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.