IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v68y2025i3d10.1007_s00181-024-02664-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new Bayesian method for estimation of value at risk and conditional value at risk

Author

Listed:
  • Jacinto Martín

    (Universidad de Extremadura)

  • M. Isabel Parra

    (Universidad de Extremadura)

  • Mario M. Pizarro

    (Universidad de Extremadura)

  • Eva L. Sanjuán

    (Universidad de Extremadura)

Abstract

Value at Risk (VaR) and Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) have become the most popular measures of market risk in Financial and Insurance fields. However, the estimation of both risk measures is challenging, because it requires the knowledge of the tail of the distribution. Therefore, Extreme Value Theory initially seemed to be one of the best tools for this kind of problems, because using peaks-over-threshold method, we can assume the tail data approximately follow a Generalized Pareto distribution (GPD). The main objection to its use is that it only employs observations over the threshold, which are usually scarce. With the aim of improving the inference process, we propose a new Bayesian method that computes estimates built with all the information available. Informative prior Bayesian (IPB) method employs the existing relations between the parameters of the loss distribution and the parameters of the GPD that models the tail data to define informative priors in order to perform Metropolis–Hastings algorithm. We show how to apply IPB when the distribution of the observations is Exponential, stable or Gamma, to make inference and predictions. .Afterwards, we perform a thorough simulation study to compare the accuracy and precision of the estimates computed by IPB and the most employed methods to estimate VaR and CVaR. Results show that IPB provides the most accurate, precise and least biased estimates, especially when there are very few tail data. Finally, data from two real examples are analysed to show the practical application of the method.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacinto Martín & M. Isabel Parra & Mario M. Pizarro & Eva L. Sanjuán, 2025. "A new Bayesian method for estimation of value at risk and conditional value at risk," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 1171-1189, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:68:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s00181-024-02664-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s00181-024-02664-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00181-024-02664-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00181-024-02664-2?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. Gerlach, Richard H. & Chen, Cathy W. S. & Chan, Nancy Y. C., 2011. "Bayesian Time-Varying Quantile Forecasting for Value-at-Risk in Financial Markets," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 29(4), pages 481-492.
    2. Danai Likitratcharoen & Pan Chudasring & Chakrin Pinmanee & Karawan Wiwattanalamphong, 2023. "The Efficiency of Value-at-Risk Models during Extreme Market Stress in Cryptocurrencies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Chen, Qian & Gerlach, Richard & Lu, Zudi, 2012. "Bayesian Value-at-Risk and expected shortfall forecasting via the asymmetric Laplace distribution," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3498-3516.
    4. Park, Myung Hyun & Kim, Joseph H.T., 2016. "Estimating extreme tail risk measures with generalized Pareto distribution," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 91-104.
    5. 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.
    6. Grażyna Trzpiot & Justyna Majewska, 2010. "Estimation of Value at Risk: extreme value and robust approaches," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 20(1), pages 131-143.
    7. Mohamed El Ghourabi & Asma Nani & Imed Gammoudi, 2021. "A value‐at‐risk computation based on heavy‐tailed distribution for dynamic conditional score models," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 2790-2799, April.
    8. Manfred Gilli & Evis këllezi, 2006. "An Application of Extreme Value Theory for Measuring Financial Risk," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 27(2), pages 207-228, May.
    9. Turan G. Bali, 2007. "A Generalized Extreme Value Approach to Financial Risk Measurement," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(7), pages 1613-1649, October.
    10. Danai Likitratcharoen & Nopadon Kronprasert & Karawan Wiwattanalamphong & Chakrin Pinmanee, 2021. "The Accuracy of Risk Measurement Models on Bitcoin Market during COVID-19 Pandemic," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Richard Gerlach & Zudi Lu & Hai Huang, 2013. "Exponentially Smoothing the Skewed Laplace Distribution for Value‐at‐Risk Forecasting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(6), pages 534-550, September.
    12. Turan G. Bali, 2007. "A Generalized Extreme Value Approach to Financial Risk Measurement," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(7), pages 1613-1649, October.
    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. 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.
    3. Mitrodima, Gelly & Oberoi, Jaideep, 2024. "CAViaR models for Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall with long range dependency features," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120880, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. 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.
    5. Julia S. Mehlitz & Benjamin R. Auer, 2021. "Time‐varying dynamics of expected shortfall in commodity futures markets," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(6), pages 895-925, June.
    6. Gerlach, Richard & Wang, Chao, 2020. "Semi-parametric dynamic asymmetric Laplace models for tail risk forecasting, incorporating realized measures," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 489-506.
    7. Chao Wang & Richard Gerlach, 2019. "Semi-parametric Realized Nonlinear Conditional Autoregressive Expectile and Expected Shortfall," Papers 1906.09961, arXiv.org.
    8. Xiaochun Liu, 2016. "Markov switching quantile autoregression," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 70(4), pages 356-395, November.
    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. Ayoub Ammy-Driss & Matthieu Garcin, 2021. "Efficiency of the financial markets during the COVID-19 crisis: time-varying parameters of fractional stable dynamics," Working Papers hal-02903655, HAL.
    11. Timo Dimitriadis & iaochun Liu & Julie Schnaitmann, 2023. "Encompassing Tests for Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Multistep Forecasts Based on Inference on the Boundary," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 412-444.
    12. Jinwook Lee & Sejeong Oh & Jongjin Baik & Changhyun Jun & Jungho Seo & Eui Hoon Lee, 2024. "Grid-Based Precipitation Quantile Estimation Considering Homogeneity Using ERA5-Land Data for the Korean Peninsula," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-26, October.
    13. Ahmed Ali & Granberg Mark & Troster Victor & Uddin Gazi Salah, 2022. "Asymmetric dynamics between uncertainty and unemployment flows in the United States," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 26(1), pages 155-172, February.
    14. Berger, Theo & Gençay, Ramazan, 2018. "Improving daily Value-at-Risk forecasts: The relevance of short-run volatility for regulatory quality assessment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 30-46.
    15. Liu, Xiaochun & Luger, Richard, 2015. "Unfolded GARCH models," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 186-217.
    16. Madhusudan Karmakar, 2013. "Estimation of tail‐related risk measures in the Indian stock market: An extreme value approach," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(3), pages 79-85, September.
    17. Lucas, André & Zhang, Xin, 2016. "Score-driven exponentially weighted moving averages and Value-at-Risk forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 293-302.
    18. Yuta Kurose & Yasuhiro Omori, 2012. "Bayesian Analysis of Time-Varying Quantiles Using a Smoothing Spline," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-845, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    19. Sharif Mozumder & M. Kabir Hassan & M. Humayun Kabir, 2024. "An evaluation of the adequacy of Lévy and extreme value tail risk estimates," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, December.
    20. Storti, Giuseppe & Wang, Chao, 2022. "Nonparametric expected shortfall forecasting incorporating weighted quantiles," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 224-239.

    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:spr:empeco:v:68:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s00181-024-02664-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.