Location of Repository

Comparing univariate and multivariate models to forecast portfolio value-at-risk

By Andre A. P., Francisco J. Nogales and Esther Ruiz


This article addresses the problem of forecasting portfolio value-at-risk (VaR) with multivariate GARCH models vis-à-vis univariate models. Existing literature has tried to answer this question by analyzing only small portfolios and using a testing framework not appropriate for ranking VaR models. In this work we provide a more comprehensive look at the problem of portfolio VaR forecasting by using more appropriate statistical tests of comparative predictive ability. Moreover, we compare univariate vs. multivariate VaR models in the context of diversified portfolios containing a large number of assets and also provide evidence based on Monte Carlo experiments. We conclude that, if the sample size is moderately large, multivariate models outperform univariate counterparts on an out-of-sample basis.Market risk, Backtesting, Conditional predictive ability, GARCH, Volatility, Capital requirements, Basel II

OAI identifier:

Suggested articles



  1. (1988). A capital asset pricing model with timevarying covariances.
  2. (2002). A multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity model with time-varying correlations.
  3. (1995). All in the family: nesting symmetric and asymmetric GARCH models.
  4. (2006). Analysis of high dimensional multivariate stochastic volatility models.
  5. (2006). Asymmetric dynamics in the correlations of global equity and bond returns.
  6. (2004). CAViaR: conditional autoregressive value at risk by regression quantiles.
  7. (2008). Do banks overstate their value-at-risk?
  8. (2002). Dynamic conditional correlation: a simple class of multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models.
  9. (1998). Evaluating interval forecasts.
  10. (2008). Evaluating the speci¯cation of covariance models for large portfolios.
  11. (2005). Evaluation and combination of conditional quantile forecasts.
  12. (1986). Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity.
  13. (2002). How accurate are value-at-risk models at commercial banks?
  14. (2008). Model averaging and value-at-risk based evaluation of large multi-asset volatility models for risk management.
  15. (2004). Modelling daily value-at-risk using realized volatility and ARCH type models.
  16. (1990). Modelling the coherence in short-run nominal exchange rates: a multivariate generalized ARCH model.
  17. (2007). Modelling volatilities and conditional correlations in futures markets with a multivariate t distribution. CESifo Working Paper No.
  18. (2003). Multi-step estimation of multivariate GARCH models.
  19. (2006). Multivariate GARCH models: a survey.
  20. (1993). On the relation between the expected value and the volatility of the nominal excess return on stocks.
  21. (2009). Optimal versus naive diversi¯cation: how ine±cient is the 1/N portfolio strategy?
  22. (2009). Practical issues in the analysis of univariate GARCH models. In
  23. (1992). Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation and inference in dynamic models with time-varying covariances.
  24. (1995). Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk measurement models.
  25. TerÄ asvirta (2009). Multivariate GARCH models. In
  26. (2001). Testing and comparing value-at-risk measures.
  27. (2006). Tests of conditional predictive ability.
  28. (2009). The ten commandments for optimizing value-at-risk and daily capital charges.
  29. (2001). Theoretical and empirical properties of dynamic conditional correlation multivariate GARCH.
  30. (2001). Value-at-risk models in ¯nance. Working Paper n. 75, European Central Bank.
  31. (2009). Value-at-risk models. In
  32. (2006). Value-at-risk prediction: a comparison of alternative strategies.
  33. Veiga (2008a). Forecasting value-at-risk with a parsimonious portfolio spillover GARCH (PS-GARCH) model.
  34. Veiga (2008b). Single-index and portfolio models for forecasting valueat-risk thresholds.
  35. (2003). Volatility forecasting for risk management.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.