IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/06-367.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Don’t Fall from the Saddle: the Importance of Higher Moments of Credit Loss Distributions

Author

Listed:
  • J. ANNAERT
  • Crispiniano Garcia Joao Batista
  • J. LAMOOT
  • G. LANINE

Abstract

The original Panjer recursion of the CreditRisk+ model is said to be unstable and therefore to yield inaccurate results of the tail distribution of credit portfolios. A much-hailed solution for the flaws of the Panjer recursion is the saddlepoint approximation method. In this paper we show that the saddlepoint approximation is an accurate and robust tool only for relatively homogenous credit portfolios with low skewness and kurtosis of the loss distribution. However, often credit portfolios are heterogeneous with large skewness and kurtosis. We show that for such portfolios the commonly applied saddlepoint approximations (the Lugannani-Rice and the Barndorff-Nielsen formulas) are not reliable. Moreover, when applied to such credit portfolios, the Lugannani-Rice formula is fragile. We explain it by the dependence of the high-order standardized cumulants and the relative error on the saddlepoints. The more the cumulants and the relative error vary, the less accurate the saddlepoint approximation is. Hence, the saddlepoint approximation is not a universal substitute to the Panjer recursion algorithm.

Suggested Citation

  • J. ANNAERT & Crispiniano Garcia Joao Batista & J. LAMOOT & G. LANINE, 2006. "Don’t Fall from the Saddle: the Importance of Higher Moments of Credit Loss Distributions," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 06/367, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:06/367
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_06_367.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gordy, Michael B., 2000. "A comparative anatomy of credit risk models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 119-149, January.
    2. repec:uts:ppaper:2002:1 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Acerbi, Carlo & Tasche, Dirk, 2002. "On the coherence of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1487-1503, July.
    4. Matthew Pritsker, 1997. "Evaluating Value at Risk Methodologies: Accuracy versus Computational Time," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 12(2), pages 201-242, October.
    5. Booth, James G. & Wood, Andrew T. A., 1995. "An example in which the Lugannani-Rice saddlepoint formula fails," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 53-61, April.
    6. Gordy, Michael B., 2003. "A risk-factor model foundation for ratings-based bank capital rules," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 199-232, July.
    7. Leif Boegelein & Alfred Hamerle & Robert Rauhmeier & Harald Scheule, 2002. "Modelling Default Rate Dynamics in the CreditRisk+ Framework," Published Paper Series 2002-1, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    8. S. Huzurbazar & Aparna V. Huzurbazar, 1999. "Survival and Hazard Functions for Progressive Diseases Using Saddlepoint Approximations," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 198-203, March.
    9. Gordy, Michael B., 2002. "Saddlepoint approximation of CreditRisk+," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1335-1353, July.
    10. Alexandre Kurth & Hadley Taylor & Armin Wagner, 2002. "An Extended Analytical Approach to Credit Risk Management," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 31(2), pages 237-253, July.
    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. Maria Stefanova, 2012. "Recovery Risiko in der Kreditportfoliomodellierung," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-8349-4226-5, December.
    2. Gürtler, Marc & Hibbeln, Martin & Vöhringer, Clemens, 2007. "Measuring concentration risk for regulatory purposes," Working Papers IF26V4, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Institute of Finance.
    3. Fermanian, Jean-David, 2014. "The limits of granularity adjustments," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-25.
    4. Jean-David Fermanian, 2013. "The Limits of Granularity Adjustments," Working Papers 2013-27, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    5. Gürtler, Marc & Heithecker, Dirk, 2005. "Systematic credit cycle risk of financial collaterals: Modelling and evidence," Working Papers FW15V2, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Institute of Finance.
    6. Annalisa Di Clemente, 2020. "Modeling Portfolio Credit Risk Taking into Account the Default Correlations Using a Copula Approach: Implementation to an Italian Loan Portfolio," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-24, June.
    7. Joël Bessis, 2009. "Risk Management in Banking," Post-Print hal-00494876, HAL.
    8. Patrick Gagliardini & Christian Gouriéroux, 2011. "Approximate Derivative Pricing for Large Classes of Homogeneous Assets with Systematic Risk," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 237-280, Spring.
    9. Ebnother, Silvan & Vanini, Paolo, 2007. "Credit portfolios: What defines risk horizons and risk measurement?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 3663-3679, December.
    10. 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.
    11. Marc Gürtler & Dirk Heithecker, 2006. "Modellkonsistente Bestimmung des LGD im IRB-Ansatz von Basel II," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 58(5), pages 554-587, August.
    12. Rockafellar, R. Tyrrell & Uryasev, Stanislav, 2002. "Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1443-1471, July.
    13. Charles-Olivier Amédée-Manesme & Fabrice Barthélémy, 2022. "Proper use of the modified Sharpe ratios in performance measurement: rearranging the Cornish Fisher expansion," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 313(2), pages 691-712, June.
    14. Manuel Kleinknecht & Wing Lon Ng, 2015. "Minimizing Basel III Capital Requirements with Unconditional Coverage Constraint," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 263-281, October.
    15. Arndt Claußen & Sebastian Löhr & Daniel Rösch, 2014. "An analytical approach for systematic risk sensitivity of structured finance products," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-37, April.
    16. Magdalena Pisa & Dennis Bams & Christian Wolff, 2012. "Modeling default correlation in a US retail loan portfolio," LSF Research Working Paper Series 12-19, Luxembourg School of Finance, University of Luxembourg.
    17. Ambrocio, Gene & Jokivuolle, Esa, 2017. "Should bank capital requirements be less risk-sensitive because of credit constraints?," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 10/2017, Bank of Finland.
    18. Caballero, Diego & Lucas, André & Schwaab, Bernd & Zhang, Xin, 2020. "Risk endogeneity at the lender/investor-of-last-resort," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 283-297.
    19. 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.
    20. Boucher, Christophe M. & Daníelsson, Jón & Kouontchou, Patrick S. & Maillet, Bertrand B., 2014. "Risk models-at-risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 72-92.

    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:rug:rugwps:06/367. 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: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.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.