IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1704.02213.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Joint Quantile and Expected Shortfall Regression Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Timo Dimitriadis
  • Sebastian Bayer

Abstract

We introduce a novel regression framework which simultaneously models the quantile and the Expected Shortfall (ES) of a response variable given a set of covariates. This regression is based on a strictly consistent loss function for the pair quantile and ES, which allows for M- and Z-estimation of the joint regression parameters. We show consistency and asymptotic normality for both estimators under weak regularity conditions. The underlying loss function depends on two specification functions, whose choice affects the properties of the resulting estimators. We find that the Z-estimator is numerically unstable and thus, we rely on M-estimation of the model parameters. Extensive simulations verify the asymptotic properties and analyze the small sample behavior of the M-estimator for different specification functions. This joint regression framework allows for various applications including estimating, forecasting, and backtesting ES, which is particularly relevant in light of the recent introduction of ES into the Basel Accords.

Suggested Citation

  • Timo Dimitriadis & Sebastian Bayer, 2017. "A Joint Quantile and Expected Shortfall Regression Framework," Papers 1704.02213, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2017.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1704.02213
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.02213
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    2. Koenker, Roger & Xiao, Zhijie, 2006. "Quantile Autoregression," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 101, pages 980-990, September.
    3. Gneiting, Tilmann, 2011. "Making and Evaluating Point Forecasts," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 106(494), pages 746-762.
    4. 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.
    5. Song Xi Chen, 2008. "Nonparametric Estimation of Expected Shortfall," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 87-107, Winter.
    6. 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.
    7. Halbleib, Roxana & Pohlmeier, Winfried, 2012. "Improving the value at risk forecasts: Theory and evidence from the financial crisis," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1212-1228.
    8. Fan, Jianqing & Yao, Qiwei, 1998. "Efficient estimation of conditional variance functions in stochastic regression," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6635, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    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. Caporale, Guglielmo Maria & Zekokh, Timur, 2019. "Modelling volatility of cryptocurrencies using Markov-Switching GARCH models," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 143-155.
    2. Fortin, Alain-Philippe & Simonato, Jean-Guy & Dionne, Georges, 2023. "Forecasting expected shortfall: Should we use a multivariate model for stock market factors?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 314-331.
    3. Sebastian Bayer & Timo Dimitriadis, 2018. "Regression Based Expected Shortfall Backtesting," Papers 1801.04112, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2019.
    4. Patton, Andrew J. & Ziegel, Johanna F. & Chen, Rui, 2019. "Dynamic semiparametric models for expected shortfall (and Value-at-Risk)," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 388-413.
    5. Ziegel, Johanna F. & Krueger, Fabian & Jordan, Alexander & Fasciati, Fernando, 2017. "Murphy Diagrams: Forecast Evaluation of Expected Shortfall," Working Papers 0632, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    6. Taylor, James W., 2020. "Forecast combinations for value at risk and expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 428-441.
    7. Joanna Bruzda, 2020. "Multistep quantile forecasts for supply chain and logistics operations: bootstrapping, the GARCH model and quantile regression based approaches," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(1), pages 309-336, March.

    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. Taylor, James W., 2022. "Forecasting Value at Risk and expected shortfall using a model with a dynamic omega ratio," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    3. Jack Fosten & Daniel Gutknecht & Marc-Oliver Pohle, 2023. "Testing Quantile Forecast Optimality," Papers 2302.02747, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    4. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    5. Ophélie Couperier & Jérémy Leymarie, 2020. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall via Multi-Quantile Regression," Working Papers halshs-01909375, HAL.
    6. 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.
    7. Bruzda, Joanna, 2019. "Quantile smoothing in supply chain and logistics forecasting," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 122-139.
    8. Luca Merlo & Lea Petrella & Valentina Raponi, 2021. "Forecasting VaR and ES using a joint quantile regression and implications in portfolio allocation," Papers 2106.06518, arXiv.org.
    9. Timo Dimitriadis & Tobias Fissler & Johanna Ziegel, 2020. "The Efficiency Gap," Papers 2010.14146, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    10. 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.
    11. Taylor, James W., 2020. "Forecast combinations for value at risk and expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 428-441.
    12. Merlo, Luca & Petrella, Lea & Raponi, Valentina, 2021. "Forecasting VaR and ES using a joint quantile regression and its implications in portfolio allocation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Qifa Xu & Lu Chen & Cuixia Jiang & Yezheng Liu, 2022. "Forecasting expected shortfall and value at risk with a joint elicitable mixed data sampling model," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 407-421, April.
    15. Julia S. Mehlitz & Benjamin R. Auer, 2021. "Time‐varying dynamics of expected shortfall in commodity futures markets," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 895-925, June.
    16. Dingshi Tian & Zongwu Cai & Ying Fang, 2018. "Econometric Modeling of Risk Measures: A Selective Review of the Recent Literature," WORKING PAPERS SERIES IN THEORETICAL AND APPLIED ECONOMICS 201807, University of Kansas, Department of Economics, revised Oct 2018.
    17. 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.
    18. Patton, Andrew J. & Ziegel, Johanna F. & Chen, Rui, 2019. "Dynamic semiparametric models for expected shortfall (and Value-at-Risk)," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 388-413.
    19. Hotta, Luiz Koodi & Trucíos Maza, Carlos César & Pereira, Pedro L. Valls & Zevallos Herencia, Mauricio Henrique, 2024. "Forecasting VaR and ES through Markov-switching GARCH models: does the specication matter?," Textos para discussão 567, FGV EESP - Escola de Economia de São Paulo, Fundação Getulio Vargas (Brazil).
    20. Jiménez, Inés & Mora-Valencia, Andrés & Perote, Javier, 2022. "Semi-nonparametric risk assessment with cryptocurrencies," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:1704.02213. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.