CVA, Wrong Way Risk, Hedging and Bermudan Swaption
“Roughly two-thirds of credit counterparty losses were due to credit valuation adjustment losses and only one-third were due to actual defaults” according to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, highlighting the importance of counterparty credit risk management to the derivatives contracts. Today, managing counterparty credit risk has become an integrated part of many derivative trading desks’ day-to-day activities and the need of accurate pricing, efficient hedging strategies and practical proxies has become critical. As a result, banks have sharpened their CVA pricing and modeling infrastructure and most have a dedicated trading desk dynamically hedging their CVA. However, if pricing techniques have become standard over the past few years, the expected positive exposure (EPE) modeling is usually not taking into account the embedded correlation between the counterparty and underlying market movements. This correlation known as wrong way risk can substantially affect the price and the related hedging strategy and is the main focus of this article.
|Date of creation:||Aug 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Morini, Massimo & Prampolini, Andrea, 2010. "Risky funding: a unified framework for counterparty and liquidity risk," MPRA Paper 23555, University Library of Munich, Germany.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:42144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.