IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ibrjnl/v16y2023i4p1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison of Information Criterion for Choosing Copula Models

Author

Listed:
  • Sonia Benito Muela
  • Carmen López-Martín

Abstract

The object of this paper is to analyse the ability of the Information Criterion in selecting the best copula model. For this study, we carry out a simulation exercise considering five one-parameter copula families- Normal, Student-t with ν degree freedom, Clayton, Gumbel and Frank. For each family copulas, three degrees of dependence and three size samples. The Information Criterion included in the comparison are AIC, BIC, HQIC, SIC. The results obtained are as follow; (i) we find that for a high dependence level (0.9) the reliability of the Information Criterion (IC) is quite good, but it reduces with the dependence level; (ii) the performance of the IC not only depends on the dependence degree but the size sample. In the case of considering negative dependence the reliability of the IC does not depend on the dependence degree but the size sample. As the size sample reduce the performed of the IC reduce. To last, in a comparison among the IC considered, we find that the BIC criterion is the most reliable follow by SIC. AIC and HQIC reaps similar results.

Suggested Citation

  • Sonia Benito Muela & Carmen López-Martín, 2023. "A Comparison of Information Criterion for Choosing Copula Models," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(4), pages 1-1, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ibrjnl:v:16:y:2023:i:4:p:1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/download/0/0/48543/52273
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ibr/article/view/0/48543
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Embrechts & Giovanni Puccetti, 2006. "Aggregating risk capital, with an application to operational risk," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 31(2), pages 71-90, December.
    2. Embrechts, Paul & Puccetti, Giovanni & Rüschendorf, Ludger, 2013. "Model uncertainty and VaR aggregation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 2750-2764.
    3. Wen, Xiaoqian & Wei, Yu & Huang, Dengshi, 2012. "Measuring contagion between energy market and stock market during financial crisis: A copula approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1435-1446.
    4. Shegorika Rajwani & Dilip Kumar, 2019. "Measuring Dependence Between the USA and the Asian Economies: A Time-varying Copula Approach," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 20(4), pages 962-980, August.
    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. Raphael Hauser & Sergey Shahverdyan & Paul Embrechts, 2014. "A General Duality Relation with Applications in Quantitative Risk Management," Papers 1410.0852, arXiv.org.
    2. Garcia-Jorcano, Laura & Benito, Sonia, 2020. "Studying the properties of the Bitcoin as a diversifying and hedging asset through a copula analysis: Constant and time-varying," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    3. Bignozzi, Valeria & Puccetti, Giovanni & Rüschendorf, Ludger, 2015. "Reducing model risk via positive and negative dependence assumptions," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 17-26.
    4. Khreshna Syuhada & Arief Hakim, 2020. "Modeling risk dependence and portfolio VaR forecast through vine copula for cryptocurrencies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-34, December.
    5. Pfeifer Dietmar & Mändle Andreas & Ragulina Olena, 2017. "New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II)," Dependence Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 246-255, October.
    6. Carole Bernard & Oleg Bondarenko & Steven Vanduffel, 2021. "A model-free approach to multivariate option pricing," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 135-155, July.
    7. Thibaut Lux & Antonis Papapantoleon, 2016. "Model-free bounds on Value-at-Risk using extreme value information and statistical distances," Papers 1610.09734, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2018.
    8. Li, Huajiao & An, Haizhong & Liu, Xueyong & Gao, Xiangyun & Fang, Wei & An, Feng, 2016. "Price fluctuation in the energy stock market based on fluctuation and co-fluctuation matrix transmission networks," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P1), pages 73-83.
    9. Barrieu, Pauline & Scandolo, Giacomo, 2014. "Assessing financial model risk," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60084, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Mainik, Georg, 2015. "Risk aggregation with empirical margins: Latin hypercubes, empirical copulas, and convergence of sum distributions," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 197-216.
    11. Carole Bernard & Ludger Rüschendorf & Steven Vanduffel & Ruodu Wang, 2017. "Risk bounds for factor models," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 631-659, July.
    12. Dietmar Pfeifer & Olena Ragulina, 2018. "Generating VaR Scenarios under Solvency II with Product Beta Distributions," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-15, October.
    13. Hofert, Marius & McNeil, Alexander J., 2015. "Subadditivity of Value-at-Risk for Bernoulli random variables," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 79-88.
    14. Fang, Sheng & Egan, Paul, 2018. "Measuring contagion effects between crude oil and Chinese stock market sectors," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 31-38.
    15. Mai Jan-Frederik & Schenk Steffen & Scherer Matthias, 2015. "Analyzing model robustness via a distortion of the stochastic root: A Dirichlet prior approach," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 32(3-4), pages 177-195, December.
    16. Chen, Chun-Da & Cheng, Chiao-Ming & Demirer, Rıza, 2017. "Oil and stock market momentum," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 151-159.
    17. Bassetti, Federico & De Giuli, Maria Elena & Nicolino, Enrica & Tarantola, Claudia, 2018. "Multivariate dependence analysis via tree copula models: An application to one-year forward energy contracts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(3), pages 1107-1121.
    18. Zhang, Yue-Jun & Chevallier, Julien & Guesmi, Khaled, 2017. "“De-financialization” of commodities? Evidence from stock, crude oil and natural gas markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 228-239.
    19. Robert Jarrow & Jeff Oxman & Yildiray Yildirim, 2010. "The cost of operational risk loss insurance," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 273-295, October.
    20. Andriosopoulos, Kostas & Galariotis, Emilios & Spyrou, Spyros, 2017. "Contagion, volatility persistence and volatility spill-overs: The case of energy markets during the European financial crisis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 217-227.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:ibrjnl:v:16:y:2023:i:4:p:1. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.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.