IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v262y2018i1d10.1007_s10479-017-2547-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When is tail mean estimation more efficient than tail median? Answers and implications for quantitative risk management

Author

Listed:
  • Roger W. Barnard

    (Texas Tech University)

  • Kent Pearce

    (Texas Tech University)

  • A. Alexandre Trindade

    (Texas Tech University)

Abstract

We investigate the relative efficiency of the empirical “tail median” versus “tail mean” as estimators of location when the data can be modeled by an exponential power distribution (EPD), a flexible family of light-tailed densities. By considering appropriate probabilities so that the quantile of the untruncated EPD (tail median) and mean of the left-truncated EPD (tail mean) coincide, limiting results are established concerning the ratio of asymptotic variances of the corresponding estimators. The most remarkable finding is that in the limit of the right tail, the asymptotic variance of the tail median estimate is approximately 36% larger than that of the tail mean, irrespective of the EPD shape parameter. This discovery has important repercussions for quantitative risk management practice, where the tail median and tail mean correspond to value-at-risk and expected shortfall, respectively. To this effect, a methodology for choosing between the two risk measures that maximizes the precision of the estimate is proposed. From an extreme value theory perspective, analogous results and procedures are discussed also for the case when the data appear to be heavy-tailed.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger W. Barnard & Kent Pearce & A. Alexandre Trindade, 2018. "When is tail mean estimation more efficient than tail median? Answers and implications for quantitative risk management," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 262(1), pages 47-65, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:262:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2547-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-017-2547-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-017-2547-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-017-2547-7?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. Zinoviy Landsman & Emiliano Valdez, 2003. "Tail Conditional Expectations for Elliptical Distributions," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(4), pages 55-71.
    2. Paul Embrechts & Marius Hofert, 2013. "A note on generalized inverses," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 77(3), pages 423-432, June.
    3. Yamai, Yasuhiro & Yoshiba, Toshinao, 2002. "Comparative Analyses of Expected Shortfall and Value-at-Risk: Their Estimation Error, Decomposition, and Optimization," Monetary and Economic Studies, Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan, vol. 20(1), pages 87-121, January.
    4. Trindade, A. Alexandre & Uryasev, Stan & Shapiro, Alexander & Zrazhevsky, Grigory, 2007. "Financial prediction with constrained tail risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(11), pages 3524-3538, November.
    5. Mineo, Angelo & Ruggieri, Mariantonietta, 2005. "A Software Tool for the Exponential Power Distribution: The normalp Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 12(i04).
    6. Acerbi, Carlo & Tasche, Dirk, 2002. "On the coherence of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1487-1503, July.
    7. Paul Embrechts & Giovanni Puccetti & Ludger Rüschendorf & Ruodu Wang & Antonela Beleraj, 2014. "An Academic Response to Basel 3.5," Risks, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-24, February.
    8. Yamai, Yasuhiro & Yoshiba, Toshinao, 2005. "Value-at-risk versus expected shortfall: A practical perspective," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 997-1015, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Danielsson, Jon & Zhou, Chen, 2015. "Why risk is so hard to measure," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62002, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. So Yeon Chun & Alexander Shapiro & Stan Uryasev, 2012. "Conditional Value-at-Risk and Average Value-at-Risk: Estimation and Asymptotics," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 739-756, August.
    12. Saralees Nadarajah, 2005. "A generalized normal distribution," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(7), pages 685-694.
    13. Georg Ch Pflug & Werner Römisch, 2007. "Modeling, Measuring and Managing Risk," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 6478, January.
    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. Bonaccolto, Giovanni & Caporin, Massimiliano & Maillet, Bertrand B., 2022. "Dynamic large financial networks via conditional expected shortfalls," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 322-336.
    2. Inés Jiménez & Andrés Mora-Valencia & Trino-Manuel Ñíguez & Javier Perote, 2020. "Portfolio Risk Assessment under Dynamic (Equi)Correlation and Semi-Nonparametric Estimation: An Application to Cryptocurrencies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Jiménez, Inés & Mora-Valencia, Andrés & Perote, Javier, 2022. "Semi-nonparametric risk assessment with cryptocurrencies," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    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. Martin Herdegen & Cosimo Munari, 2023. "An elementary proof of the dual representation of Expected Shortfall," Papers 2306.14506, arXiv.org.
    2. Osmundsen, Kjartan Kloster, 2018. "Using expected shortfall for credit risk regulation," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 80-93.
    3. 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.
    4. So Yeon Chun & Alexander Shapiro & Stan Uryasev, 2012. "Conditional Value-at-Risk and Average Value-at-Risk: Estimation and Asymptotics," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 739-756, August.
    5. Radu Tunaru, 2015. "Model Risk in Financial Markets:From Financial Engineering to Risk Management," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 9524, January.
    6. Cerqueti, Roy & Giacalone, Massimiliano & Panarello, Demetrio, 2019. "A Generalized Error Distribution Copula-based method for portfolios risk assessment," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 524(C), pages 687-695.
    7. Dobrislav Dobrev∗ & Travis D. Nesmith & Dong Hwan Oh, 2017. "Accurate Evaluation of Expected Shortfall for Linear Portfolios with Elliptically Distributed Risk Factors," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, February.
    8. Wei Jiang & Steven Kou, 2021. "Simulating risk measures via asymptotic expansions for relative errors," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 907-942, July.
    9. Zaichao Du & Juan Carlos Escanciano, 2017. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall: Accounting for Tail Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 940-958, April.
    10. Mario Brandtner, 2016. "Spektrale Risikomaße: Konzeption, betriebswirtschaftliche Anwendungen und Fallstricke," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 66(2), pages 75-115, April.
    11. Embrechts Paul & Wang Ruodu, 2015. "Seven Proofs for the Subadditivity of Expected Shortfall," Dependence Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Dimitrios G. Konstantinides & Georgios C. Zachos, 2019. "Exhibiting Abnormal Returns Under a Risk Averse Strategy," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 551-566, June.
    13. Marco Rocco, 2011. "Extreme value theory for finance: a survey," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 99, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    14. Koch-Medina, Pablo & Munari, Cosimo, 2016. "Unexpected shortfalls of Expected Shortfall: Extreme default profiles and regulatory arbitrage," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 141-151.
    15. Marcell Béli & Kata Váradi, 2017. "A possible methodology for determining the initial margin," Financial and Economic Review, Magyar Nemzeti Bank (Central Bank of Hungary), vol. 16(2), pages 119-147.
    16. Massimiliano Amarante, 2016. "A representation of risk measures," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 39(1), pages 95-103, April.
    17. Danielsson, Jon & Zhou, Chen, 2015. "Why risk is so hard to measure," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62002, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Albrecht, Peter, 2003. "Risk measures," Papers 03-01, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    19. Brandtner, Mario, 2018. "Expected Shortfall, spectral risk measures, and the aggravating effect of background risk, or: risk vulnerability and the problem of subadditivity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 138-149.
    20. Mathieu Bargès & Hélène Cossette & Etienne Marceau, 2009. "TVaR-based capital allocation with copulas," Working Papers hal-00431265, HAL.

    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:spr:annopr:v:262:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-017-2547-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.