IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mbr/jmonec/v16y2021i2p165-186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimation of Value at Risk (VaR) Based On Lévy-GARCH Models: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange

Author

Listed:
  • Amiri , Hossein

    (Faculty of Economics, Kharazmi University)

  • Najafi Nejad , Mahmood

    (Faculty of Economics, Kharazmi University)

  • Mousavi , Seyede Mohadese

    (Faculty of Economics, Kharazmi University)

Abstract

This paper aims to estimate the Value-at-Risk (VaR) using GARCH type models with improved return distribution. Value at Risk (VaR) is an essential benchmark for measuring the risk of financial markets quantitatively. The parametric method, historical simulation, and Monte Carlo simulation have been proposed in several financial mathematics and engineering studies to calculate VaR, that each of them has some limitations. Therefore, these methods are not recommended in the case of complications in financial modeling since they require considering a series of assumptions, such as symmetric distributions in return on assets. Because the stock exchange data in the present study are skewed, asymmetric distributions along with symmetric distributions have been used for estimating VaR in this study. In this paper, the performance of fifteen VaR models with a compound of three conditional volatility characteristics including GARCH, APARCH and GJR and five distributional assumptions (normal, Student’s t, skewed Student’s t and two different Lévy distributions, include normal-inverse Gaussian (NIG) and generalized hyperbolic (GHyp)) for return innovations are investigated in the chemical, base metals, automobile, and cement industries. To do so, daily data from of Tehran Stock Exchange are used from 2013 to 2020. The results show that the GJR model with NIG distribution is more accurate than other models. According to the industry index loss function, the highest and lowest risks are related to the automotive and cement industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Amiri , Hossein & Najafi Nejad , Mahmood & Mousavi , Seyede Mohadese, 2021. "Estimation of Value at Risk (VaR) Based On Lévy-GARCH Models: Evidence from Tehran Stock Exchange," Journal of Money and Economy, Monetary and Banking Research Institute, Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran, vol. 16(2), pages 165-186, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:mbr:jmonec:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:165-186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jme.mbri.ac.ir/article-1-539-en.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://jme.mbri.ac.ir/article-1-539-en.html
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Longqing, 2017. "A Comparative Study of GARCH and EVT Model in Modeling Value-at-Risk," MPRA Paper 85645, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Sydney Ludvigson & Martin Lettau & Daniel Greenwald, 2014. "The Origins of Stock Market Fluctuations," 2014 Meeting Papers 542, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. 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.
    4. Robert F. Engle & Simone Manganelli, 2004. "CAViaR: Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk by Regression Quantiles," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 367-381, October.
    5. Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2005. "Tests for Skewness, Kurtosis, and Normality for Time Series Data," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 49-60, January.
    6. Robert F. Engle & Simone Manganelli, 1999. "CAViaR: Conditional Value at Risk by Quantile Regression," NBER Working Papers 7341, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
    8. Francq, Christian & Zakoïan, Jean-Michel, 2018. "Estimation risk for the VaR of portfolios driven by semi-parametric multivariate models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 205(2), pages 381-401.
    9. Bollerslev, Tim & Chou, Ray Y. & Kroner, Kenneth F., 1992. "ARCH modeling in finance : A review of the theory and empirical evidence," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1-2), pages 5-59.
    10. William J. Baumol, 1963. "An Expected Gain-Confidence Limit Criterion for Portfolio Selection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 174-182, October.
    11. Jarque, Carlos M. & Bera, Anil K., 1980. "Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 255-259.
    12. Lopez, Jose A, 2001. "Evaluating the Predictive Accuracy of Volatility Models," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 87-109, March.
    13. Ding, Zhuanxin & Granger, Clive W. J. & Engle, Robert F., 1993. "A long memory property of stock market returns and a new model," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 83-106, June.
    14. 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.).
    15. Fan, Ying & Zhang, Yue-Jun & Tsai, Hsien-Tang & Wei, Yi-Ming, 2008. "Estimating 'Value at Risk' of crude oil price and its spillover effect using the GED-GARCH approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 3156-3171, November.
    16. Manuela Braione & Nicolas K. Scholtes, 2016. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk under Different Distributional Assumptions," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-27, January.
    17. Roy Cerqueti & Massimiliano Giacalone & Raffaele Mattera, 2020. "Skewed non-Gaussian GARCH models for cryptocurrencies volatility modelling," Papers 2004.11674, arXiv.org.
    18. Zakoian, Jean-Michel, 1994. "Threshold heteroskedastic models," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 931-955, September.
    19. Lindsay A. Lechner & Timothy C. Ovaert, 2010. "Value-at-risk: Techniques to account for leptokurtosis and asymmetric behavior in returns distributions," Journal of Risk Finance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 11(5), pages 464-480, November.
    20. Bangzhu Zhu & Shunxin Ye & Kaijian He & Julien Chevallier & Rui Xie, 2019. "Measuring the risk of European carbon market: an empirical mode decomposition-based value at risk approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 281(1), pages 373-395, October.
    21. Hélyette Geman & Dilip B. Madan & Marc Yor, 2001. "Time Changes for Lévy Processes," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(1), pages 79-96, January.
    22. BRAIONE, Manuela & SCHOLTES, Nicolas K., 2016. "Forecasting Value-at-Risk under Different Distributional Assumptions," LIDAM Reprints CORE 2733, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    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. Turan Bali & Panayiotis Theodossiou, 2007. "A conditional-SGT-VaR approach with alternative GARCH models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 241-267, April.
    2. Laura Garcia‐Jorcano & Alfonso Novales, 2021. "Volatility specifications versus probability distributions in VaR forecasting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(2), pages 189-212, March.
    3. Stavroyiannis, S. & Makris, I. & Nikolaidis, V. & Zarangas, L., 2012. "Econometric modeling and value-at-risk using the Pearson type-IV distribution," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 10-17.
    4. Laura Garcia-Jorcano & Alfonso Novales, 2020. "A dominance approach for comparing the performance of VaR forecasting models," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 1411-1448, September.
    5. Krzysztof Echaust & Małgorzata Just, 2021. "Tail Dependence between Crude Oil Volatility Index and WTI Oil Price Movements during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-21, July.
    6. Trucíos, Carlos, 2019. "Forecasting Bitcoin risk measures: A robust approach," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 836-847.
    7. Wei Kuang, 2022. "Oil tail-risk forecasts: from financial crisis to COVID-19," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(4), pages 420-460, December.
    8. Bali, Turan G. & Mo, Hengyong & Tang, Yi, 2008. "The role of autoregressive conditional skewness and kurtosis in the estimation of conditional VaR," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 269-282, February.
    9. Caporale, Guglielmo Maria & Zekokh, Timur, 2019. "Modelling volatility of cryptocurrencies using Markov-Switching GARCH models," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 143-155.
    10. 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.
    11. Gonzalo Cortazar & Alejandro Bernales & Diether Beuermann, 2005. "Methodology and Implementation of Value-at-Risk Measures in Emerging Fixed-Income Markets with Infrequent Trading," Finance 0512030, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Li, Gang & Li, Yong, 2015. "Forecasting copper futures volatility under model uncertainty," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(P2), pages 167-176.
    13. Zhi-Fu Mi & Yi-Ming Wei & Bao-Jun Tang & Rong-Gang Cong & Hao Yu & Hong Cao & Dabo Guan, 2017. "Risk assessment of oil price from static and dynamic modelling approaches," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(9), pages 929-939, February.
    14. Fung, Kennard & Jeong, Jiin & Pereira, Javier, 2022. "More to cryptos than bitcoin: A GARCH modelling of heterogeneous cryptocurrencies," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PA).
    15. Szymon Lis & Marcin Chlebus, 2021. "Comparison of the accuracy in VaR forecasting for commodities using different methods of combining forecasts," Working Papers 2021-11, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    16. Krzysztof Echaust & Małgorzata Just, 2020. "Value at Risk Estimation Using the GARCH-EVT Approach with Optimal Tail Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    17. 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.
    18. Halkos, George & Tzirivis, Apostolos, 2018. "Effective energy commodities’ risk management: Econometric modeling of price volatility," MPRA Paper 90781, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Degiannakis, Stavros & Potamia, Artemis, 2017. "Multiple-days-ahead value-at-risk and expected shortfall forecasting for stock indices, commodities and exchange rates: Inter-day versus intra-day data," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 176-190.
    20. Bayer, Sebastian, 2018. "Combining Value-at-Risk forecasts using penalized quantile regressions," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 56-77.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Lévy Distribution; Value at Risk (VaR); GARCH Model; Risk Management.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D51 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Exchange and Production Economies
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms

    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:mbr:jmonec:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:165-186. 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: M. E. (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mbcbiir.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.