IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eneeco/v91y2020ics0140988320302267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tail risk of electricity futures

Author

Listed:
  • Peña, Juan Ignacio
  • Rodríguez, Rosa
  • Mayoral, Silvia

Abstract

This paper compares the in-sample and out-of-sample performance of several models for computing the tail risk of one-month and one-year electricity futures contracts traded in the NordPool, French, German, and Spanish markets in 2008–2017. As measures of tail risk, we use the one-day-ahead Value-at-Risk (VaR) and the Expected Shortfall (ES). With VaR, the AR (1)-GARCH (1,1) model with Student-t distribution is the best-performing specification with 88% cases in which the Fisher test accepts the model, with a success rate of 94% in the left tail and of 81% in the right tail. The model passes the test of model adequacy in the 100% of the cases in the NordPool and German markets, but only in the 88% and 63% of the cases in the Spanish and French markets. With ES, this model passes the test of model adequacy in 100% of cases in all markets. Historical Simulation and Quantile Regression-based approaches misestimate tail risks. The right-hand tail of the returns is more difficult to model than the left-hand tail and therefore financial regulators and the administrators of futures markets should take these results into account when setting additional regulatory capital requirements and margin account regulations to short positions.

Suggested Citation

  • Peña, Juan Ignacio & Rodríguez, Rosa & Mayoral, Silvia, 2020. "Tail risk of electricity futures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:91:y:2020:i:c:s0140988320302267
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104886
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140988320302267
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. James W. Taylor, 2008. "Using Exponentially Weighted Quantile Regression to Estimate Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Society for Financial Econometrics, vol. 6(3), pages 382-406, Summer.
    2. Boroumand, Raphaël Homayoun & Goutte, Stéphane & Porcher, Simon & Porcher, Thomas, 2015. "Hedging strategies in energy markets: The case of electricity retailers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 503-509.
    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. Zaichao Du & Juan Carlos Escanciano, 2017. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall: Accounting for Tail Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 940-958, April.
    5. Knittel, Christopher R. & Roberts, Michael R., 2005. "An empirical examination of restructured electricity prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 791-817, September.
    6. Lars Ivar Hagfors & Hilde Hørthe Kamperud & Florentina Paraschiv & Marcel Prokopczuk & Alma Sator & Sjur Westgaard, 2016. "Prediction of extreme price occurrences in the German day-ahead electricity market," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(12), pages 1929-1948, December.
    7. Acerbi, Carlo & Tasche, Dirk, 2002. "On the coherence of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1487-1503, July.
    8. Boroumand, Raphaël Homayoun & Goutte, Stéphane & Porcher, Simon & Porcher, Thomas, 2015. "Hedging strategies in energy markets: The case of electricity retailers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 503-509.
    9. Paul H. Kupiec, 1995. "Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk measurement models," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 95-24, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    10. Fanone, Enzo & Gamba, Andrea & Prokopczuk, Marcel, 2013. "The case of negative day-ahead electricity prices," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 22-34.
    11. Deng, S.J. & Oren, S.S., 2006. "Electricity derivatives and risk management," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 940-953.
    12. Fong Chan, Kam & Gray, Philip, 2006. "Using extreme value theory to measure value-at-risk for daily electricity spot prices," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 283-300.
    13. McNeil, Alexander J. & Frey, Rudiger, 2000. "Estimation of tail-related risk measures for heteroscedastic financial time series: an extreme value approach," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(3-4), pages 271-300, November.
    14. Paraschiv, Florentina & Erni, David & Pietsch, Ralf, 2014. "The impact of renewable energies on EEX day-ahead electricity prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 196-210.
    15. Vehvilainen, Iivo & Keppo, Jussi, 2003. "Managing electricity market price risk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 136-147, February.
    16. Sanda, Gaute Egeland & Olsen, Eirik Tandberg & Fleten, Stein-Erik, 2013. "Selective hedging in hydro-based electricity companies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 326-338.
    17. Fred Espen Benth & Jūratė Šaltytė Benth & Steen Koekebakker, 2008. "Stochastic Modeling of Electricity and Related Markets," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 6811, March.
    18. Pérignon, Christophe & Smith, Daniel R., 2010. "The level and quality of Value-at-Risk disclosure by commercial banks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 362-377, February.
    19. Christoffersen, Peter F, 1998. "Evaluating Interval Forecasts," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(4), pages 841-862, November.
    20. Alvaro Escribano & J. Ignacio Peña & Pablo Villaplana, 2011. "Modelling Electricity Prices: International Evidence," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 73(5), pages 622-650, October.
    21. Pritsker, Matthew, 2006. "The hidden dangers of historical simulation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 561-582, February.
    22. Iván Blanco, Juan Ignacio Peña, and Rosa Rodriguez, 2018. "Modelling Electricity Swaps with Stochastic Forward Premium Models," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    23. Susanne Emmer & Marie Kratz & Dirk Tasche, 2013. "What is the best risk measure in practice? A comparison of standard measures," Papers 1312.1645, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2015.
    24. Hagfors, Lars Ivar & Bunn, Derek & Kristoffersen, Eline & Staver, Tiril Toftdahl & Westgaard, Sjur, 2016. "Modeling the UK electricity price distributions using quantile regression," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 231-243.
    25. González-Pedraz, Carlos & Moreno, Manuel & Peña, Juan Ignacio, 2014. "Tail risk in energy portfolios," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 422-434.
    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. Nieto, Maria Rosa & Ruiz, Esther, 2016. "Frontiers in VaR forecasting and backtesting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 475-501.
    2. Tafakori, Laleh & Pourkhanali, Armin & Fard, Farzad Alavi, 2018. "Forecasting spikes in electricity return innovations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 508-526.
    3. 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.
    4. Benjamin R. Auer & Benjamin Mögel, 2016. "How Accurate are Modern Value-at-Risk Estimators Derived from Extreme Value Theory?," CESifo Working Paper Series 6288, CESifo.
    5. Weron, Rafał, 2014. "Electricity price forecasting: A review of the state-of-the-art with a look into the future," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1030-1081.
    6. 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.
    7. Xu, Qifa & Chen, Lu & Jiang, Cuixia & Yu, Keming, 2020. "Mixed data sampling expectile regression with applications to measuring financial risk," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 469-486.
    8. Zaichao Du & Juan Carlos Escanciano, 2017. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall: Accounting for Tail Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 940-958, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Dimitriadis, Timo & Liu, Xiaochun & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2020. "Encompassing tests for value at risk and expected shortfall multi-step forecasts based on inference on the boundary," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 11-2020, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    11. James M. O'Brien & Pawel J. Szerszen, 2014. "An Evaluation of Bank VaR Measures for Market Risk During and Before the Financial Crisis," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2014-21, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    12. O’Brien, James & Szerszeń, Paweł J., 2017. "An evaluation of bank measures for market risk before, during and after the financial crisis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 215-234.
    13. Michael B. Gordy & Alexander J. McNeil, 2017. "Spectral backtests of forecast distributions with application to risk management," Papers 1708.01489, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2019.
    14. Angelica Gianfreda & Derek Bunn, 2018. "A Stochastic Latent Moment Model for Electricity Price Formation," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS46, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    15. 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.
    16. Lazar, Emese & Zhang, Ning, 2019. "Model risk of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 74-93.
    17. Antonio Díaz & Gonzalo García-Donato & Andrés Mora-Valencia, 2019. "Quantifying Risk in Traditional Energy and Sustainable Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, January.
    18. Louzis, Dimitrios P. & Xanthopoulos-Sisinis, Spyros & Refenes, Apostolos P., 2011. "Are realized volatility models good candidates for alternative Value at Risk prediction strategies?," MPRA Paper 30364, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. 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.
    20. Debbie Dupuis, Geneviève Gauthier, and Fréderic Godin, 2016. "Short-term Hedging for an Electricity Retailer," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Electricity markets; Futures markets; Value-at-risk; Expected shortfall; Backtesting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • G13 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Contingent Pricing; Futures Pricing
    • L94 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Electric Utilities
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General

    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:eee:eneeco:v:91:y:2020:i:c:s0140988320302267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nithya Sathishkumar). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eneco .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.