IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/insuma/v81y2018icp18-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which eligible assets are compatible with comonotonic capital requirements?

Author

Listed:
  • Koch-Medina, Pablo
  • Munari, Cosimo
  • Svindland, Gregor

Abstract

Within the context of capital adequacy, we study comonotonicity of risk measures in terms of the primitives of the theory: acceptance sets and eligible, or reference, assets. We show that comonotonicity cannot be characterized by the properties of the acceptance set alone and heavily depends on the choice of the eligible asset. In fact, in many important cases, comonotonicity is only compatible with risk-free eligible assets. The incompatibility with risky eligible assets is systematic whenever the acceptability criterion is based on Value-at-Risk or any convex distortion risk measure such as Expected Shortfall. These findings qualify and arguably call for a critical appraisal of the meaning and the role of comonotonicity within a capital adequacy context.

Suggested Citation

  • Koch-Medina, Pablo & Munari, Cosimo & Svindland, Gregor, 2018. "Which eligible assets are compatible with comonotonic capital requirements?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 18-26.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:81:y:2018:i:c:p:18-26
    DOI: 10.1016/j.insmatheco.2018.04.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167668717304705
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2018.04.003?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
    ---><---

    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. Walter Farkas & Pablo Koch-Medina & Cosimo Munari, 2012. "Capital requirements with defaultable securities," Papers 1203.4610, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2014.
    2. Rieger, Marc Oliver, 2017. "Characterization of acceptance sets for co-monotone risk measures," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 147-152.
    3. Kaas, Rob & Laeven, Roger J.A. & Nelsen, Roger B., 2009. "Worst VaR scenarios with given marginals and measures of association," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 146-158, April.
    4. Embrechts, Paul & Puccetti, Giovanni & Rüschendorf, Ludger, 2013. "Model uncertainty and VaR aggregation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 2750-2764.
    5. Embrechts, Paul & Hoing, Andrea & Puccetti, Giovanni, 2005. "Worst VaR scenarios," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 115-134, August.
    6. Dhaene, J. & Denuit, M. & Goovaerts, M. J. & Kaas, R. & Vyncke, D., 2002. "The concept of comonotonicity in actuarial science and finance: theory," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 3-33, August.
    7. Dhaene, J. & Denuit, M. & Goovaerts, M. J. & Kaas, R. & Vyncke, D., 2002. "The concept of comonotonicity in actuarial science and finance: applications," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 133-161, October.
    8. Artzner, Philippe & Delbaen, Freddy & Koch-Medina, Pablo, 2009. "Risk Measures and Efficient use of Capital 1," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 101-116, May.
    9. Farkas, Walter & Koch-Medina, Pablo & Munari, Cosimo, 2014. "Capital requirements with defaultable securities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 58-67.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Charalambos D. Aliprantis & Kim C. Border, 2006. "Infinite Dimensional Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-29587-7, September.
    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. 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.

    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. Andreas H. Hamel & Frank Heyde, 2021. "Set-Valued T -Translative Functions and Their Applications in Finance," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-33, September.
    2. Maria Arduca & Cosimo Munari, 2021. "Risk measures beyond frictionless markets," Papers 2111.08294, arXiv.org.
    3. Ruodu Wang & Ričardas Zitikis, 2021. "An Axiomatic Foundation for the Expected Shortfall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1413-1429, March.
    4. Yichun Chi & Zuo Quan Xu & Sheng Chao Zhuang, 2022. "Distributionally Robust Goal-Reaching Optimization in the Presence of Background Risk," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 351-382, August.
    5. Bellini, Fabio & Koch-Medina, Pablo & Munari, Cosimo & Svindland, Gregor, 2021. "Law-invariant functionals that collapse to the mean," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 83-91.
    6. Koch-Medina, Pablo & Moreno-Bromberg, Santiago & Munari, Cosimo, 2015. "Capital adequacy tests and limited liability of financial institutions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 93-102.
    7. 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.
    8. Di Lascio, F. Marta L. & Giammusso, Davide & Puccetti, Giovanni, 2018. "A clustering approach and a rule of thumb for risk aggregation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-248.
    9. Furman, Edward & Wang, Ruodu & Zitikis, Ričardas, 2017. "Gini-type measures of risk and variability: Gini shortfall, capital allocations, and heavy-tailed risks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 70-84.
    10. Gilles Boevi Koumou & Georges Dionne, 2022. "Coherent Diversification Measures in Portfolio Theory: An Axiomatic Foundation," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, October.
    11. Wang, Bin & Wang, Ruodu, 2015. "Extreme negative dependence and risk aggregation," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 12-25.
    12. Lauzier, Jean-Gabriel & Lin, Liyuan & Wang, Ruodu, 2023. "Pairwise counter-monotonicity," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 279-287.
    13. Fabio Bellini & Pablo Koch-Medina & Cosimo Munari & Gregor Svindland, 2020. "Law-invariant functionals that collapse to the mean," Papers 2009.04144, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
    14. Ruodu Wang & Ricardas Zitikis, 2018. "Weak comonotonicity," Papers 1812.04827, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2019.
    15. Felix-Benedikt Liebrich & Gregor Svindland, 2018. "Risk sharing for capital requirements with multidimensional security markets," Papers 1809.10015, arXiv.org.
    16. Takaaki Koike & Liyuan Lin & Ruodu Wang, 2022. "Joint mixability and notions of negative dependence," Papers 2204.11438, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    17. Andreas H Hamel, 2018. "Monetary Measures of Risk," Papers 1812.04354, arXiv.org.
    18. Radu Tunaru, 2015. "Model Risk in Financial Markets:From Financial Engineering to Risk Management," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 9524, January.
    19. Laudagé, Christian & Sass, Jörn & Wenzel, Jörg, 2022. "Combining multi-asset and intrinsic risk measures," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 254-269.
    20. W. Farkas & A. Smirnow, 2016. "Intrinsic risk measures," Papers 1610.08782, arXiv.org.

    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:insuma:v:81:y:2018:i:c:p:18-26. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505554 .

    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.