IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/revfec/v41y2023i3p283-321.html

Forecasting liquidity‐adjusted VaR: A conditional EVT‐copula approach

Author

Listed:
  • Madhusudan Karmakar
  • Ravi Khadotra

Abstract

This study models the joint distribution of individual stock returns and bid‐ask spreads using combined EGARCH‐EVT and combined GP‐INGARCH‐EVT processes for the marginals, and bivariate copulas for the dependence structure. We use the proposed approach to first simulate returns and spreads of individual stocks from different countries and regions, and then forecast the Liquidity‐adjusted Value‐at‐Risk (L‐VaR) measure according to three types of L‐VaR models. The backtesting results suggest that the proposed simulated L‐VaR models perform better than the competing L‐VaR/VaR models in forecasting L‐VaR. It is also observed that the simulated L‐VaR models perform better than the competing L‐VaR/VaR models in predicting the economic downturn.

Suggested Citation

  • Madhusudan Karmakar & Ravi Khadotra, 2023. "Forecasting liquidity‐adjusted VaR: A conditional EVT‐copula approach," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 283-321, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:revfec:v:41:y:2023:i:3:p:283-321
    DOI: 10.1002/rfe.1176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/rfe.1176
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/rfe.1176?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert F. Engle & Jeffrey R. Russell, 1998. "Autoregressive Conditional Duration: A New Model for Irregularly Spaced Transaction Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1127-1162, September.
    2. 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.).
    3. René Ferland & Alain Latour & Driss Oraichi, 2006. "Integer‐Valued GARCH Process," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(6), pages 923-942, November.
    4. Chordia, Tarun & Roll, Richard & Subrahmanyam, Avanidhar, 2000. "Commonality in liquidity," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 3-28, April.
    5. Marimoutou, Velayoudoum & Raggad, Bechir & Trabelsi, Abdelwahed, 2009. "Extreme Value Theory and Value at Risk: Application to oil market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 519-530, July.
    6. Anil Bangia & Francis X. Diebold & Til Schuermann & John D. Stroughair, 1998. "Modeling Liquidity Risk With Implications for Traditional Market Risk Measurement and Management," New York University, Leonard N. Stern School Finance Department Working Paper Seires 99-062, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business-.
    7. 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.
    8. Gong, Yuting & Chen, Qiang & Liang, Jufang, 2018. "A mixed data sampling copula model for the return-liquidity dependence in stock index futures markets," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 586-598.
    9. Acharya, Viral V. & Pedersen, Lasse Heje, 2005. "Asset pricing with liquidity risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 375-410, August.
    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. Harish Kamal & Samit Paul, 2024. "Liquidity‐adjusted value‐at‐risk using extreme value theory and copula approach," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 1747-1769, September.
    2. Weiß, Gregor N.F. & Supper, Hendrik, 2013. "Forecasting liquidity-adjusted intraday Value-at-Risk with vine copulas," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3334-3350.
    3. Herrera, Rodrigo & Rodriguez, Alejandro & Pino, Gabriel, 2017. "Modeling and forecasting extreme commodity prices: A Markov-Switching based extreme value model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 129-143.
    4. Candia, Claudio & Herrera, Rodrigo, 2024. "An empirical review of dynamic extreme value models for forecasting value at risk, expected shortfall and expectile," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Ra l De Jes s Guti rrez & Lidia E. Carvajal Guti rrez & Oswaldo Garcia Salgado, 2023. "Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Estimation for Mexico s Isthmus Crude Oil Using Long-Memory GARCH-EVT Combined Approaches," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(4), pages 467-480, July.
    7. Alexander, Carol & Sheedy, Elizabeth, 2008. "Developing a stress testing framework based on market risk models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 2220-2236, October.
    8. Lang, Korbinian & Auer, Benjamin R., 2020. "The economic and financial properties of crude oil: A review," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    9. Wilson Calmon & Eduardo Ferioli & Davi Lettieri & Johann Soares & Adrian Pizzinga, 2021. "An Extensive Comparison of Some Well‐Established Value at Risk Methods," International Statistical Review, International Statistical Institute, vol. 89(1), pages 148-166, April.
    10. 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.
    11. Ren, Xiaohang & Li, Yiying & Sun, Xianming & Bu, Ruijun & Jawadi, Fredj, 2023. "Modeling extreme risk spillovers between crude oil and Chinese energy futures markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    12. Yıldırım Külekci, Bükre & Korn, Ralf & Selcuk-Kestel, A. Sevtap, 2024. "Ruin probability for heavy-tailed and dependent losses under reinsurance strategies," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 226(C), pages 118-138.
    13. 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.
    14. Youssef, Manel & Belkacem, Lotfi & Mokni, Khaled, 2015. "Value-at-Risk estimation of energy commodities: A long-memory GARCH–EVT approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 99-110.
    15. Halkos, George E. & Tsirivis, Apostolos S., 2019. "Value-at-risk methodologies for effective energy portfolio risk management," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 197-212.
    16. Wang, Xinya & Lucey, Brian M. & Huang, Shupei, 2025. "Financial uncertainties drive extreme risks in China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 104(PB).
    17. 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.
    18. Ghorbel, Ahmed & Trabelsi, Abdelwahed, 2014. "Energy portfolio risk management using time-varying extreme value copula methods," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 470-485.
    19. 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.
    20. Herrera, Rodrigo, 2013. "Energy risk management through self-exciting marked point process," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 64-76.

    More about this item

    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:wly:revfec:v:41:y:2023:i:3:p:283-321. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1873-5924 .

    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.