IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sankhb/v85y2023i1d10.1007_s13571-022-00294-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modified Expected Shortfall: a Coherent Risk Measure for Elliptical Family of Distributions

Author

Listed:
  • Deepak K. Jadhav

    (Savitribai Phule Pune University)

  • Ramanathan Thekke Variyam

    (Savitribai Phule Pune University)

Abstract

The ‘Modified Expected Shortfall’ is a risk measure proposed by Jadhav et al. (J. Risk 16, 69–83, 2013) is not a coherent risk measure in general. In this paper, we prove that ‘Modified Expected Shortfall’ is a coherent risk measure under univariate and multivariate elliptical families of distributions. The Modified Expected Shortfall performs better than the Expected Shortfall and is found to be lower in magnitude. Backtesting results support the superiority of Modified Expected Shortfall when compared with the Expected Shortfall.

Suggested Citation

  • Deepak K. Jadhav & Ramanathan Thekke Variyam, 2023. "Modified Expected Shortfall: a Coherent Risk Measure for Elliptical Family of Distributions," Sankhya B: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Springer;Indian Statistical Institute, vol. 85(1), pages 234-256, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sankhb:v:85:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s13571-022-00294-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s13571-022-00294-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13571-022-00294-1
    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/s13571-022-00294-1?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. Zinoviy Landsman & Emiliano Valdez, 2003. "Tail Conditional Expectations for Elliptical Distributions," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(4), pages 55-71.
    2. Acerbi, Carlo & Tasche, Dirk, 2002. "On the coherence of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(7), pages 1487-1503, July.
    3. 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.).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Cambanis, Stamatis & Huang, Steel & Simons, Gordon, 1981. "On the theory of elliptically contoured distributions," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 368-385, September.
    7. Inui, Koji & Kijima, Masaaki, 2005. "On the significance of expected shortfall as a coherent risk measure," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 853-864, April.
    8. 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.
    9. Carlo Acerbi & Claudio Nordio & Carlo Sirtori, 2001. "Expected Shortfall as a Tool for Financial Risk Management," Papers cond-mat/0102304, arXiv.org.
    10. Yamai, Yasuhiro & Yoshiba, Toshinao, 2002. "On the Validity of Value-at-Risk: Comparative Analyses with Expected Shortfall," Monetary and Economic Studies, Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan, vol. 20(1), pages 57-85, January.
    11. Marcelo Brutti Righi & Paulo Sergio Ceretta, 2015. "Shortfall Deviation Risk: An alternative to risk measurement," Papers 1501.02007, arXiv.org, revised May 2016.
    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. James Ming Chen, 2018. "On Exactitude in Financial Regulation: Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, and Expectiles," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-28, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Lazar, Emese & Zhang, Ning, 2019. "Model risk of expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 74-93.
    4. Marie Kratz & Yen H Lok & Alexander J Mcneil, 2016. "Multinomial var backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall," Working Papers hal-01424279, HAL.
    5. Zoia, Maria Grazia & Biffi, Paola & Nicolussi, Federica, 2018. "Value at risk and expected shortfall based on Gram-Charlier-like expansions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 92-104.
    6. Enrique Molina‐Muñoz & Andrés Mora‐Valencia & Javier Perote, 2021. "Backtesting expected shortfall for world stock index ETFs with extreme value theory and Gram–Charlier mixtures," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 4163-4189, July.
    7. 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.
    8. Nieto, María Rosa & Ruiz Ortega, Esther, 2008. "Measuring financial risk : comparison of alternative procedures to estimate VaR and ES," DES - Working Papers. Statistics and Econometrics. WS ws087326, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Estadística.
    9. Sasa Zikovic & Randall Filer, 2009. "Hybrid Historical Simulation VaR and ES: Performance in Developed and Emerging Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 2820, CESifo.
    10. Kratz, Marie & Lok, Y-H & McNeil, Alexander J., 2016. "Multinomial VaR Backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall," ESSEC Working Papers WP1617, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    11. 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.
    12. Peña, Juan Ignacio & Rodríguez, Rosa & Mayoral, Silvia, 2020. "Tail risk of electricity futures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    13. Righi, Marcelo Brutti & Borenstein, Denis, 2018. "A simulation comparison of risk measures for portfolio optimization," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 105-112.
    14. Maria Stefanova, 2012. "Recovery Risiko in der Kreditportfoliomodellierung," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-8349-4226-5, September.
    15. Mathieu Bargès & Hélène Cossette & Etienne Marceau, 2009. "TVaR-based capital allocation with copulas," Working Papers hal-00431265, HAL.
    16. Timotheos Angelidis & Stavros Degiannakis, 2007. "Backtesting VaR Models: An Expected Shortfall Approach," Working Papers 0701, University of Crete, Department of Economics.
    17. Sander Barendse & Erik Kole & Dick van Dijk, 2023. "Backtesting Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall in the Presence of Estimation Error," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 528-568.
    18. Kerkhof, Jeroen & Melenberg, Bertrand, 2004. "Backtesting for risk-based regulatory capital," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(8), pages 1845-1865, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Antonio Díaz & Gonzalo García-Donato & Andrés Mora-Valencia, 2019. "Quantifying Risk in Traditional Energy and Sustainable Investments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, January.

    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:sankhb:v:85:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s13571-022-00294-1. 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.