Bayesian modeling and forecasting of Value‐at‐Risk via threshold realized volatility

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 747-765
Author(s):  
Cathy W.S. Chen ◽  
Toshiaki Watanabe
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Bayesian Modeling ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Realized Volatility ◽  
Modeling And Forecasting

Volatility Forecast by Volatility Index and Its Use as a Risk Management Tool Under a Value-at-Risk Approach

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (02) ◽  
pp. 1850010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yam Wing Siu
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Risk Management ◽  
Risk Premium ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Realized Volatility ◽  
Management Tool ◽  
Spot Price ◽  
Pricing Options ◽  
Significance Levels ◽  
Risk Approach

This paper examines the predicting power of the volatility indexes of VIX and VHSI on the future volatilities (or called realized volatility, [Formula: see text] of their respective underlying indexes of S&P500 Index, SPX and Hang Seng Index, HSI. It is found that volatilities indexes of VIX and VHSI, on average, are numerically greater than the realized volatilities of SPX and HSI, respectively. Further analysis indicates that realized volatility, if used for pricing options, would, on some occasions, result in greatest losses of 2.21% and 1.91% of the spot price of SPX and HSI, respectively while the greatest profits are 2.56% and 2.93% of the spot price of SPX and HSI, respectively, making it not an ideal benchmark for validating volatility forecasting techniques in relation to option pricing. Hence, a new benchmark (fair volatility, [Formula: see text] that considers the premium of option and the cost of dynamic hedging the position is proposed accordingly. It reveals that, on average, options priced by volatility indexes contain a risk premium demanded by the option sellers. However, the options could, on some occasions, result in greatest losses of 4.85% and 3.60% of the spot price of SPX and HSI, respectively while the greatest profits are 4.60% and 5.49% of the spot price of SPX and HSI, respectively. Nevertheless, it can still be a valuable tool for risk management. [Formula: see text]-values of various significance levels for value-at-risk and conditional value-at-value have been statistically determined for US, Hong Kong, Australia, India, Japan and Korea markets.

scholarly journals Value-at-risk modeling and forecasting with range-based volatility models: empirical evidence

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (75) ◽  
pp. 361-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro dos Santos Maciel ◽  
Rosangela Ballini
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Garch Models ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Risk Modeling ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Volatility Models ◽  
Modeling And Forecasting ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Market Indexes

ABSTRACT This article considers range-based volatility modeling for identifying and forecasting conditional volatility models based on returns. It suggests the inclusion of range measuring, defined as the difference between the maximum and minimum price of an asset within a time interval, as an exogenous variable in generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH) models. The motivation is evaluating whether range provides additional information to the volatility process (intraday variability) and improves forecasting, when compared to GARCH-type approaches and the conditional autoregressive range (CARR) model. The empirical analysis uses data from the main stock market indexes for the U.S. and Brazilian economies, i.e. S&P 500 and IBOVESPA, respectively, within the period from January 2004 to December 2014. Performance is compared in terms of accuracy, by means of value-at-risk (VaR) modeling and forecasting. The out-of-sample results indicate that range-based volatility models provide more accurate VaR forecasts than GARCH models.

scholarly journals Forecasting Realized Volatility of Russian stocks using Google Trends and Implied Volatility

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-88
Author(s):  
T. Bazhenov ◽  
D. Fantazzini
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Implied Volatility ◽  
Realized Volatility ◽  
Google Trends ◽  
Probability Level ◽  
Sample Analysis ◽  
Search Activity ◽  
Additional Information

This work proposes to forecast the Realized Volatility (RV) and the Value-at-Risk (VaR) of the most liquid Russian stocks using GARCH, ARFIMA and HAR models, including both the implied volatility computed from options prices and Google Trends data. The in-sample analysis showed that only the implied volatility had a significant effect on the realized volatility across most stocks and estimated models, whereas Google Trends did not have any significant effect. The outof-sample analysis highlighted that models including the implied volatility improved their forecasting performances, whereas models including internet search activity worsened their performances in several cases. Moreover, simple HAR and ARFIMA models without additional regressors often reported the best forecasts for the daily realized volatility and for the daily Value-at-Risk at the 1 % probability level, thus showing that efficiency gains more than compensate any possible model misspecifications and parameters biases. Our empirical evidence shows that, in the case of Russian stocks, Google Trends does not capture any additional information already included in the implied volatility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document