IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2003.10479.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Non-asymptotic convergence rates for the plug-in estimation of risk measures

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Bartl
  • Ludovic Tangpi

Abstract

Let $\rho$ be a general law--invariant convex risk measure, for instance the average value at risk, and let $X$ be a financial loss, that is, a real random variable. In practice, either the true distribution $\mu$ of $X$ is unknown, or the numerical computation of $\rho(\mu)$ is not possible. In both cases, either relying on historical data or using a Monte-Carlo approach, one can resort to an i.i.d.\ sample of $\mu$ to approximate $\rho(\mu)$ by the finite sample estimator $\rho(\mu_N)$ (where $\mu_N$ denotes the empirical measure of $\mu$). In this article we investigate convergence rates of $\rho(\mu_N)$ to $\rho(\mu)$. We provide non-asymptotic convergence rates for both the deviation probability and the expectation of the estimation error. The sharpness of these convergence rates is analyzed. Our framework further allows for hedging, and the convergence rates we obtain depend neither on the dimension of the underlying assets, nor on the number of options available for trading.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Bartl & Ludovic Tangpi, 2020. "Non-asymptotic convergence rates for the plug-in estimation of risk measures," Papers 2003.10479, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2003.10479
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.10479
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mathieu CAMBOU & Damir FILIPOVIC, 2014. "Model Uncertainty and Scenario Aggregation," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 14-38, Swiss Finance Institute, revised Nov 2015.
    2. Yu Feng & Ralph Rudd & Christopher Baker & Qaphela Mashalaba & Melusi Mavuso & Erik Schlögl, 2021. "Quantifying the Model Risk Inherent in the Calibration and Recalibration of Option Pricing Models," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Niushan Gao & Denny Leung & Cosimo Munari & Foivos Xanthos, 2018. "Fatou property, representations, and extensions of law-invariant risk measures on general Orlicz spaces," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 395-415, April.
    4. Beutner, Eric & Zähle, Henryk, 2010. "A modified functional delta method and its application to the estimation of risk functionals," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 101(10), pages 2452-2463, November.
    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. Rama Cont & Romain Deguest & Giacomo Scandolo, 2010. "Robustness and sensitivity analysis of risk measurement procedures," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 593-606.
    7. Aharon Ben-Tal & Marc Teboulle, 1986. "Expected Utility, Penalty Functions, and Duality in Stochastic Nonlinear Programming," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1445-1466, November.
    8. 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.
    9. Elyès Jouini & Walter Schachermayer & Nizar Touzi, 2006. "Law Invariant Risk Measures Have the Fatou Property," Post-Print halshs-00176522, HAL.
    10. Sujin Kim & Raghu Pasupathy & Shane G. Henderson, 2015. "A Guide to Sample Average Approximation," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Michael C Fu (ed.), Handbook of Simulation Optimization, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 207-243, Springer.
    11. Daniel Bartl & Samuel Drapeau & Ludovic Tangpi, 2020. "Computational aspects of robust optimized certainty equivalents and option pricing," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 287-309, January.
    12. Pitera, Marcin & Schmidt, Thorsten, 2018. "Unbiased estimation of risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 133-145.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/342 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Rama Cont & Romain Deguest & Giacomo Scandolo, 2010. "Robustness and sensitivity analysis of risk measurement procedures," Post-Print hal-00413729, HAL.
    15. Xing Jin & Michael C. Fu & Xiaoping Xiong, 2003. "Probabilistic Error Bounds for Simulation Quantile Estimators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(2), pages 230-246, February.
    16. Patrick Cheridito & Tianhui Li, 2009. "Risk Measures On Orlicz Hearts," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 189-214, April.
    17. Pal, Soumik, 2007. "Computing strategies for achieving acceptability: A Monte Carlo approach," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 117(11), pages 1587-1605, November.
    18. Aharon Ben‐Tal & Marc Teboulle, 2007. "An Old‐New Concept Of Convex Risk Measures: The Optimized Certainty Equivalent," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 449-476, July.
    19. Tomasz R. Bielecki & Igor Cialenco & Marcin Pitera & Thorsten Schmidt, 2019. "Fair Estimation of Capital Risk Allocation," Papers 1902.10044, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2019.
    20. Furman, Edward & Zitikis, Ricardas, 2008. "Weighted risk capital allocations," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 263-269, October.
    21. Hans Föllmer & Alexander Schied, 2002. "Convex measures of risk and trading constraints," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 429-447.
    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. Tadese, Mekonnen & Drapeau, Samuel, 2020. "Relative bound and asymptotic comparison of expectile with respect to expected shortfall," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 387-399.
    2. Jiarui Chu & Ludovic Tangpi, 2021. "Non-asymptotic estimation of risk measures using stochastic gradient Langevin dynamics," Papers 2111.12248, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2023.
    3. Daniel Bartl & Shahar Mendelson, 2021. "On Monte-Carlo methods in convex stochastic optimization," Papers 2101.07794, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.

    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. Jiarui Chu & Ludovic Tangpi, 2021. "Non-asymptotic estimation of risk measures using stochastic gradient Langevin dynamics," Papers 2111.12248, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2023.
    2. Mucahit Aygun & Fabio Bellini & Roger J. A. Laeven, 2023. "Elicitability of Return Risk Measures," Papers 2302.13070, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    3. Daniel Lacker, 2018. "Liquidity, Risk Measures, and Concentration of Measure," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 813-837, August.
    4. Maria Arduca & Cosimo Munari, 2021. "Risk measures beyond frictionless markets," Papers 2111.08294, arXiv.org.
    5. Ruodu Wang & Ričardas Zitikis, 2021. "An Axiomatic Foundation for the Expected Shortfall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1413-1429, March.
    6. Ruodu Wang & Yunran Wei & Gordon E. Willmot, 2020. "Characterization, Robustness, and Aggregation of Signed Choquet Integrals," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 993-1015, August.
    7. Wei Wang & Huifu Xu & Tiejun Ma, 2020. "Quantitative Statistical Robustness for Tail-Dependent Law Invariant Risk Measures," Papers 2006.15491, arXiv.org.
    8. Daniel Bartl & Samuel Drapeau & Ludovic Tangpi, 2017. "Computational aspects of robust optimized certainty equivalents and option pricing," Papers 1706.10186, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2019.
    9. Marcelo Brutti Righi, 2018. "A theory for combinations of risk measures," Papers 1807.01977, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    10. Geissel Sebastian & Sass Jörn & Seifried Frank Thomas, 2018. "Optimal expected utility risk measures," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 35(1-2), pages 73-87, January.
    11. Kim, Sojung & Weber, Stefan, 2022. "Simulation methods for robust risk assessment and the distorted mix approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(1), pages 380-398.
    12. Weiwei Li & Dejian Tian, 2023. "Robust optimized certainty equivalents and quantiles for loss positions with distribution uncertainty," Papers 2304.04396, arXiv.org.
    13. Liu, Peng & Wang, Ruodu & Wei, Linxiao, 2020. "Is the inf-convolution of law-invariant preferences law-invariant?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 144-154.
    14. Marcelo Brutti Righi & Paulo Sergio Ceretta, 2015. "Shortfall Deviation Risk: An alternative to risk measurement," Papers 1501.02007, arXiv.org, revised May 2016.
    15. Samuel Drapeau & Michael Kupper, 2013. "Risk Preferences and Their Robust Representation," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 28-62, February.
    16. Marcelo Brutti Righi & Marlon Ruoso Moresco, 2020. "Inf-convolution and optimal risk sharing with countable sets of risk measures," Papers 2003.05797, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    17. Xue Dong He & Hanqing Jin & Xun Yu Zhou, 2015. "Dynamic Portfolio Choice When Risk Is Measured by Weighted VaR," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 773-796, March.
    18. Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinová & Birgit Rudloff, 2021. "Elicitability and identifiability of set-valued measures of systemic risk," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 133-165, January.
    19. Zhongde Luo, 2020. "Nonparametric kernel estimation of CVaR under $$\alpha $$α-mixing sequences," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 615-643, April.
    20. Daniel Lacker, 2015. "Liquidity, risk measures, and concentration of measure," Papers 1510.07033, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2015.

    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:2003.10479. 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.