State-Uncertainty preferences and the Risk Premium in the Exchange rate market

This paper introduces state-uncertainty preferences into the Lucas (1982) economy, showing that this type of preferences helps to explain the exchange rate risk premium. Under these preferences we can distinguish between two factors driving the exchange rate risk premium: “macroeconomic risk” and “the risk associated with variation in the private agents’ perception on the level of uncertainty”. State-uncertainty preferences amount to assuming that a given level of consumption will yield a higher level of utility the lower is the level of uncertainty perceived by consumers. Furthermore, empirical evidence from three main European economies in the transition period to the euro provides empirical support for the modelRisk premium, taste shocks, fundamental uncertainty.

Macroeconomic and policy uncertainty and Exchange rate risk Premium

The goal of this paper is to identify the main determinants of the risk premium in some European currency markets just before the EMU. To that extent, we start from Lucas (1982) exchange rate model and derive an analytical expression for the forward premium. This expression includes money and production variables and it is quite standard, except for the inclusion of macroeconomic policy risk. Under some standard assumptions, this formula simplifies substantially and becomes amenable to regression analysis. Then, using standard measures of money and production, as well as interest rate swap spreads as indicators of macroeconomic policy risk, the theoretical expression is estimated. We provide evidence suggesting that it is policy uncertainty, much more than fundamental macroeconomic uncertainty, which determined risk premium over the convergence process to the euro. Whether these results can be extended to similar experiences for other currency unions remains open for future research.Risk premium, Peso Problem, Macroeconomic policy risk, European monetary System.

Seasonal Fluctuations and Dynamic Equilibrium Models of Exchange Rate

Most dynamic equilibrium models of exchange rate are not able to generate monthly time series with the typical properties of actual exchange rate. If the exogenous endowments in an equilibrium exchange rate model contain seasonal variations, then the exchange rate will as well. In this paper, we show how in this framework, seasonal preferences can help to remove seasonality of the exchange rate simulated time series.Exchange rate, Equilibrium model, Seasonality.

GFC-Robust Risk Management Strategies under the Basel Accord

A risk management strategy is proposed as being robust to the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) by selecting a Value-at-Risk (VaR) forecast that combines the forecasts of different VaR models. The robust forecast is based on the median of the point VaR forecasts of a set of conditional volatility models. This risk management strategy is GFC-robust in the sense that maintaining the same risk management strategies before, during and after a financial crisis would lead to comparatively low daily capital charges and violation penalties. The new method is illustrated by using the S&P500 index before, during and after the 2008-09 global financial crisis. We investigate the performance of a variety of single and combined VaR forecasts in terms of daily capital requirements and violation penalties under the Basel II Accord, as well as other criteria. The median VaR risk management strategy is GFC-robust as it provides stable results across different periods relative to other VaR forecasting models. The new strategy based on combined forecasts of single models is straightforward to incorporate into existing computer software packages that are used by banks and other financial institutions.Value-at-Risk (VaR), daily capital charges, robust forecasts, violation penalties, optimizing strategy, aggressive risk management strategy, conservative risk management strategy, Basel II Accord, global financial crisis.

Optimal Risk Management Before, During and After the 2008-09 Financial Crisis

In this paper we advance the idea that optimal risk management under the Basel II Accord will typically require the use of a combination of different models of risk. This idea is illustrated by analyzing the best empirical models of risk for five stock indexes before, during,and after the 2008-09 financial crisis. The data used are the Dow Jones Industrial Average, Financial Times Stock Exchange 100, Nikkei, Hang Seng and Standard and Poor’s 500 Composite Index. The primary goal of the exercise is to identify the best models for risk management in each period according to the minimization of average daily capital requirements under the Basel II Accord. It is found that the best risk models can and do vary before, during and after the 2008-09 financial crisis. Moreover, it is found that an aggressive risk management strategy, namely the supremum strategy that combines different models of risk, can result in significant gains in average daily capital requirements, relative to the strategy of using single models, while staying within the limits of the Basel II Accord.Optimal risk management, average daily capital requirements, alternative risk strategies, value-at-risk forecasts, combining risk models.

Has the Basel II Accord Encouraged Risk Management During the 2008-09 Financial Crisis?

The Basel II Accord requires that banks and other Authorized Deposit-taking Institutions (ADIs) communicate their daily risk forecasts to the appropriate monetary authorities at the beginning of each trading day, using one or more risk models to measure Value-at-Risk (VaR). The risk estimates of these models are used to determine capital requirements and associated capital costs of ADIs, depending in part on the number of previous violations, whereby realised losses exceed the estimated VaR. In this paper we define risk management in terms of choosing sensibly from a variety of risk models, discuss the selection of optimal risk models, consider combining alternative risk models, discuss the choice between a conservative and aggressive risk management strategy, and evaluate the effects of the Basel II Accord on risk management. We also examine how risk management strategies performed during the 2008-09 financial crisis, evaluate how the financial crisis affected risk management practices, forecasting VaR and daily capital charges, and discuss alternative policy recommendations, especially in light of the financial crisis. These issues are illustrated using Standard and Poor’s 500 Index, with an emphasis on how risk management practices were monitored and encouraged by the Basel II Accord regulations during the financial crisis.Value-at-Risk (VaR), daily capital charges, exogenous and endogenous violations, violation penalties, optimizing strategy, risk forecasts, aggressive or conservative risk management strategies, Basel II Accord, financial crisis.

GFC-Robust Risk Management Strategies under the Basel Accord

A risk management strategy is proposed as being robust to the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) by selecting a Value-at-Risk (VaR) forecast that combines the forecasts of different VaR models. The robust forecast is based on the median of the point VaR forecasts of a set of conditional volatility models. This risk management strategy is GFC-robust in the sense that maintaining the same risk management strategies before, during and after a financial crisis would lead to comparatively low daily capital charges and violation penalties. The new method is illustrated by using the S&P500 index before, during and after the 2008-09 global financial crisis. We investigate the performance of a variety of single and combined VaR forecasts in terms of daily capital requirements and violation penalties under the Basel II Accord, as well as other criteria. The median VaR risk management strategy is GFC-robust as it provides stable results across different periods relative to other VaR forecasting models. The new strategy based on combined forecasts of single models is straightforward to incorporate into existing computer software packages that are used by banks and other financial institutions.Value-at-Risk (VaR); daily capital charges; robust forecasts; violation penalties; optimizing strategy; aggressive risk management strategy; conservative risk management strategy; Basel II Accord; global financial crisis

What Happened to Risk Management During the 2008-09 Financial Crisis?

When dealing with market risk under the Basel II Accord, variation pays in the form of lower capital requirements and higher profits. Typically, GARCH type models are chosen to forecast Value-at-Risk (VaR) using a single risk model. In this paper we illustrate two useful variations to the standard mechanism for choosing forecasts, namely: (i) combining different forecast models for each period, such as a daily model that forecasts the supremum or infinum value for the VaR; (ii) alternatively, select a single model to forecast VaR, and then modify the daily forecast, depending on the recent history of violations under the Basel II Accord. We illustrate these points using the Standard and Poor’s 500 Composite Index. In many cases we find significant decreases in the capital requirements, while incurring a number of violations that stays within the Basel II Accord limits.Risk management, Violations, Aggressive risk strategy, Conservative risk strategy, Value-at-risk forecasts.

International Evidence on GFC-robust Forecasts for Risk Management under the Basel Accord

A risk management strategy that is designed to be robust to the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), in the sense of selecting a Value-at-Risk (VaR) forecast that combines the forecasts of different VaR models, was proposed in McAleer et al. (2010c). The robust forecast is based on the median of the point VaR forecasts of a set of conditional volatility models. Such a risk management strategy is robust to the GFC in the sense that, while maintaining the same risk management strategy before, during and after a financial crisis, it will lead to comparatively low daily capital charges and violation penalties for the entire period. This paper presents evidence to support the claim that the median point forecast of VaR is generally GFC-robust. We investigate the performance of a variety of single and combined VaR forecasts in terms of daily capital requirements and violation penalties under the Basel II Accord, as well as other criteria. In the empirical analysis, we choose several major indexes, namely French CAC, German DAX, US Dow Jones, UK FTSE100, Hong Kong Hang Seng, Spanish Ibex35, Japanese Nikkei, Swiss SMI and US S&P500. The GARCH, EGARCH, GJR and Riskmetrics models, as well as several other strategies, are used in the comparison. Backtesting is performed on each of these indexes using the Basel II Accord regulations for 2008-10 to examine the performance of the Median strategy in terms of the number of violations and daily capital charges, among other criteria. The Median is shown to be a profitable and safe strategy for risk management, both in calm and turbulent periods, as it provides a reasonable number of violations and daily capital charges. The Median also performs well when both total losses and the asymmetric linear tick loss function are considered.Median strategy; Value-at-Risk (VaR); daily capital charges; robust forecasts; violation penalties; optimizing strategy; aggressive risk management; conservative risk management; Basel II Accord; global financial crisis (GFC)

International Evidence on GFC-robust Forecasts for Risk Management under the Basel Accord

A risk management strategy that is designed to be robust to the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), in the sense of selecting a Value-at-Risk (VaR) forecast that combines the forecasts of different VaR models, was proposed in McAleer et al. (2010c). The robust forecast is based on the median of the point VaR forecasts of a set of conditional volatility models. Such a risk management strategy is robust to the GFC in the sense that, while maintaining the same risk management strategy before, during and after a financial crisis, it will lead to comparatively low daily capital charges and violation penalties for the entire period. This paper presents evidence to support the claim that the median point forecast of VaR is generally GFC-robust. We investigate the performance of a variety of single and combined VaR forecasts in terms of daily capital requirements and violation penalties under the Basel II Accord, as well as other criteria. In the empirical analysis, we choose several major indexes, namely French CAC, German DAX, US Dow Jones, UK FTSE100, Hong Kong Hang Seng, Spanish Ibex35, Japanese Nikkei, Swiss SMI and US S&P500. The GARCH, EGARCH, GJR and Riskmetrics models, as well as several other strategies, are used in the comparison. Backtesting is performed on each of these indexes using the Basel II Accord regulations for 2008-10 to examine the performance of the Median strategy in terms of the number of violations and daily capital charges, among other criteria. The Median is shown to be a profitable and safe strategy for risk management, both in calm and turbulent periods, as it provides a reasonable number of violations and daily capital charges. The Median also performs well when both total losses and the asymmetric linear tick loss function are consideredMedian strategy, Value-at-Risk (VaR), daily capital charges, robust forecasts, violation penalties, optimizing strategy, aggressive risk management, conservative risk management, Basel II Accord, global financial crisis (GFC).