IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/mathfi/v30y2020i4p1337-1367.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk functionals with convex level sets

Author

Listed:
  • Ruodu Wang
  • Yunran Wei

Abstract

We analyze the “convex level sets” (CxLS) property of risk functionals, which is a necessary condition for the notions of elicitability, identifiability, and backtestability, popular in the recent statistics and risk management literature. We put the CxLS property in the multidimensional setting, with a special focus on signed Choquet integrals, a class of risk functionals that are generally not monotone or convex. We obtain two main analytical results in dimension one and dimension two, by characterizing the CxLS property of all one‐dimensional signed Choquet integrals, and that of all two‐dimensional signed Choquet integrals with a quantile component. Using these results, we proceed to show that under some continuity assumption, a comonotonic‐additive coherent risk measure is co‐elicitable with Value‐at‐Risk if and only if it is the corresponding Expected Shortfall. The new findings generalize several results in the recent literature, and partially answer an open question on the characterization of multidimensional elicitability.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruodu Wang & Yunran Wei, 2020. "Risk functionals with convex level sets," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1337-1367, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:mathfi:v:30:y:2020:i:4:p:1337-1367
    DOI: 10.1111/mafi.12270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/mafi.12270
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/mafi.12270?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
    ---><---

    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. R. Rockafellar & Stan Uryasev & Michael Zabarankin, 2006. "Generalized deviations in risk analysis," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 51-74, January.
    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. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    5. Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Coherence And Elicitability," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 901-918, October.
    6. Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinov'a & Birgit Rudloff, 2019. "Elicitability and Identifiability of Systemic Risk Measures," Papers 1907.01306, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2019.
    7. 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.
    8. Paul Embrechts & Haiyan Liu & Tiantian Mao & Ruodu Wang, 2017. "Quantile-Based Risk Sharing with Heterogeneous Beliefs," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 17-65, Swiss Finance Institute, revised Jan 2018.
    9. Rama Cont & Romain Deguest & Giacomo Scandolo, 2010. "Robustness and sensitivity analysis of risk measurement procedures," Post-Print hal-00413729, HAL.
    10. Tobias Fissler & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2019. "Evaluating Range Value at Risk Forecasts," Papers 1902.04489, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    11. Fabio Bellini & Valeria Bignozzi, 2015. "On elicitable risk measures," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(5), pages 725-733, May.
    12. De Waegenaere, Anja & Wakker, Peter P., 2001. "Nonmonotonic Choquet integrals," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 45-60, September.
    13. Acerbi, Carlo, 2002. "Spectral measures of risk: A coherent representation of subjective risk aversion," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1505-1518, July.
    14. Alexander J. McNeil & Rüdiger Frey & Paul Embrechts, 2015. "Quantitative Risk Management: Concepts, Techniques and Tools Revised edition," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 2, number 10496.
    15. Steven Kou & Xianhua Peng, 2016. "On the Measurement of Economic Tail Risk," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 1056-1072, October.
    16. Wang, Ruodu & Ziegel, Johanna F., 2015. "Elicitable distortion risk measures: A concise proof," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 172-175.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Stefan Weber, 2006. "Distribution‐Invariant Risk Measures, Information, And Dynamic Consistency," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 419-441, April.
    20. C. Heinrich, 2014. "The mode functional is not elicitable," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 101(1), pages 245-251.
    21. Dekel, Eddie, 1986. "An axiomatic characterization of preferences under uncertainty: Weakening the independence axiom," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 304-318, December.
    22. Newey, Whitney K & Powell, James L, 1987. "Asymmetric Least Squares Estimation and Testing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 819-847, July.
    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. Xia Han & Bin Wang & Ruodu Wang & Qinyu Wu, 2021. "Risk Concentration and the Mean-Expected Shortfall Criterion," Papers 2108.05066, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    2. Fissler, Tobias & Pesenti, Silvana M., 2023. "Sensitivity measures based on scoring functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1408-1423.
    3. Paul Embrechts & Tiantian Mao & Qiuqi Wang & Ruodu Wang, 2021. "Bayes risk, elicitability, and the Expected Shortfall," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1190-1217, October.
    4. Tobias Fissler & Silvana M. Pesenti, 2022. "Sensitivity Measures Based on Scoring Functions," Papers 2203.00460, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    5. Fissler Tobias & Ziegel Johanna F., 2021. "On the elicitability of range value at risk," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 38(1-2), pages 25-46, January.
    6. Timo Dimitriadis & Tobias Fissler & Johanna Ziegel, 2020. "The Efficiency Gap," Papers 2010.14146, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    7. Qiuqi Wang & Ruodu Wang & Johanna Ziegel, 2022. "E-backtesting," Papers 2209.00991, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    8. Ruodu Wang & Ričardas Zitikis, 2021. "An Axiomatic Foundation for the Expected Shortfall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1413-1429, March.
    9. Ruodu Wang & Qinyu Wu, 2022. "Quasi-convexity in mixtures for generalized rank-dependent functions," Papers 2209.03425, arXiv.org.

    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. Samuel Solgon Santos & Marcelo Brutti Righi & Eduardo de Oliveira Horta, 2022. "The limitations of comonotonic additive risk measures: a literature review," Papers 2212.13864, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    2. Ruodu Wang & Ričardas Zitikis, 2021. "An Axiomatic Foundation for the Expected Shortfall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1413-1429, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Fissler Tobias & Ziegel Johanna F., 2021. "On the elicitability of range value at risk," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 38(1-2), pages 25-46, January.
    5. Marcelo Brutti Righi & Fernanda Maria Muller & Marlon Ruoso Moresco, 2022. "A risk measurement approach from risk-averse stochastic optimization of score functions," Papers 2208.14809, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    6. Bellini, Fabio & Fadina, Tolulope & Wang, Ruodu & Wei, Yunran, 2022. "Parametric measures of variability induced by risk measures," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 270-284.
    7. Fabio Bellini & Tolulope Fadina & Ruodu Wang & Yunran Wei, 2020. "Parametric measures of variability induced by risk measures," Papers 2012.05219, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    8. Paul Embrechts & Tiantian Mao & Qiuqi Wang & Ruodu Wang, 2021. "Bayes risk, elicitability, and the Expected Shortfall," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1190-1217, October.
    9. 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.
    10. Del Brio, Esther B. & Mora-Valencia, Andrés & Perote, Javier, 2020. "Risk quantification for commodity ETFs: Backtesting value-at-risk and expected shortfall," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Steven Kou & Xianhua Peng, 2016. "On the Measurement of Economic Tail Risk," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 1056-1072, October.
    12. Marcelo Brutti Righi, 2018. "A theory for combinations of risk measures," Papers 1807.01977, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    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 & Fernanda Maria Muller & Marlon Ruoso Moresco, 2017. "On a robust risk measurement approach for capital determination errors minimization," Papers 1707.09829, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
    15. Tobias Fissler & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2019. "Evaluating Range Value at Risk Forecasts," Papers 1902.04489, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    16. Mucahit Aygun & Fabio Bellini & Roger J. A. Laeven, 2023. "Elicitability of Return Risk Measures," Papers 2302.13070, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    17. Matthias Fischer & Thorsten Moser & Marius Pfeuffer, 2018. "A Discussion on Recent Risk Measures with Application to Credit Risk: Calculating Risk Contributions and Identifying Risk Concentrations," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-28, December.
    18. Fissler, Tobias & Pesenti, Silvana M., 2023. "Sensitivity measures based on scoring functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1408-1423.
    19. Kratz, Marie & Lok, Yen H. & McNeil, Alexander J., 2018. "Multinomial VaR backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 393-407.
    20. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.

    More about this item

    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:bla:mathfi:v:30:y:2020:i:4:p:1337-1367. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0960-1627 .

    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.