Algorithms for Optimization of Value-at-Risk

  • Nicklas Larsen
  • Helmut Mausser
  • Stanislav Uryasev
Part of the Applied Optimization book series (APOP, volume 70)

Abstract

This paper suggests two new heuristic algorithms for optimization of Value-at-Risk (VaR). By definition, VaR is an estimate of the maximum portfolio loss during a standardized period with some confidence level. The optimization algo- rithms are based on the minimization of the closely related risk measure Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR). For continuous distributions, CVaR is the expected loss exceeding VaR, and is also known as Mean Excess Loss or Expected Shortfall. For discrete distributions, CVaR is the weighted average of VaR and losses exceeding VaR. CVaR is an upper bound for VaR, therefore, minimization of CVaR also reduces VaR. The algorithms are tested by minimizing the credit risk of a portfolio of emerging market bonds. Numerical experiments showed that the algorithms are efficient and can handle a large number of instruments and scenarios. However, calculations identified a deficiency of VaR risk measure, compared to CVaR. Minimization of VaR leads to an undesirable stretch of the tail of the distribution exceeding VaR. For portfolios with skewed distributions, such as credit risk, minimization of VaR may result in a significant increase of high losses exceeding VaR. For the credit risk problem studied in this paper, VaR minimization leads to about 16% increase of the average loss for the worst 1% scenarios (compared to the worst 1% scenarios in CVaR minimum solution). 1% includes 200 of 20000 scenarios, which were used for estimating credit risk in this case study.

Keywords

Supply Chain Credit Risk Active Scenario Expect Shortfall Financial Engineer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Acerbi, C., Nordio, C. and C. Sirtori, Expected shortfall as a tool for financial risk management. Working paper, (2001), (Can be downloaded from http://www.gloriamundi.org).
  2. [2]
    Acerbi, C., and D. Tasche, On the coherence of expected shortfall. Working paper, (2001), (Can be downloaded from http://www.gloriamundi.org).
  3. [3]
    Andersson, F., Mausser, H., Rosen, D. and S. Uryasev (2001): Credit Risk Optimization with Conditional Value-at-Risk Criterion. Mathematical Programming, Series B, December, 2000, relevant Research Report 99–9 can be downloaded from http://www.ise.ufl.edu/uryasev/pubs.html#t.
  4. [4]
    Andersen, J.V., and D. Sornette (1999): Have Your Cake and Eat It Too: Increasing Returns While Lowering Large Risks. Working Paper, University of Los Angeles, can be downloaded from http://www.gloriamundi.org.
  5. [5]
    Artzner, P., Delbaen F., Eber, J.M., and D. Heath (1999) Coherent Measures of Risk. Mathematical Finance, 9, 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Basak, S. and A. Shapiro (1998): Value-at-Risk Based Management: Optimal Policies and Asset Prices. Working Paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, can be downloaded from http://www.gloriamundi.org.
  7. [7]
    Birge J.R. and F. Louveaux (1997): Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Bucay, N. and D. Rosen (1999): Credit Risk of an International Bond Portfolio: a Case Study. ALGO Research Quarterly. Vol. 2, No. 1, 9–29.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    CreditMetrics: The Benchmark for Understanding Credit Risk (1997): Technical Document, J.P.Morgan Inc., New York, NY.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    CreditRisk+: A Credit Risk Management Framework(1997): Credit Suisse Financial Products, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Duffle, D. and J. Pan (1997): An Overview of Value-at-Risk. Journal of Derivatives. 4, 7–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Emmer S., Kluppelberg, C., and R. Korn. (2000): Optimal Portfolios with Bounded Capital at Risks. Working paper, Munich University of Technology, June.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Ermoliev, Yu. and R. J-B Wets (Eds.) (1988): Numerical Techniques for Stochastic Optimization,Springer Series in Computational Mathematics, 10.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Jorion, Ph. (1996): Value at Risk: A New Benchmark for Measuring Derivatives Risk. Irwin Professional Pub.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Gaivoronski, A.A. and G. Pflug (2000): Value at Risk in portfolio optimization: properties and computational approach, NTNU, Department of Industrial Economics and Technology Management, Working paper, July.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Gourieroux, C., Laurent, J.P. and O. Scaillet (2000): Sensitivity Analysis of Values-at-Risk.,Working paper, Universite de Louvan, January, can be downloaded from http://www.gloriamundi.org.
  17. [17]
    Grootweld H. and W.G. Hallerbach (2000): Upgrading VaR from Diagnostic Metric to Decision Variable: A Wise Thing to Do?, Report 2003 Erasmus Center for Financial Research, June.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Kall, P. and S.W. Wallace (1994) Stochastic Programming. Willey, Chichester.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Kan, Y.S., and Kibzun, A.I. (1996). Stochastic Programming Problems with Probability and Quantile Functions, John Wiley and Sons, 316.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Kast, R., Luciano, E., and L. Peccati (1998): VaR and Optimization. 2nd International Workshop on Preferences and Decisions, Trento, July 1–3 1998.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Kealhofer, S. (1997): Portfolio Management of Default Risk, KMV Corporation, Document # 999–0000–033, Revision 2. 1.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Lucas, A., and Klaassen, P. (1998): Extreme Returns, Downside Risk, and Optimal Asset Allocation. Journal of Portfolio Management, Vol. 25, No. 1, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Markowitz, H.M. (1952): Portfolio Selection. Journal of finance. Vol. 7, 1, 77–91.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Mausser, H. and D. Rosen (1998): Beyond VaR: From Measuring Risk to Managing Risk, Algo Research Quarterly, Vol. 1, No. 2, 5–20.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Mausser, H. and D. Rosen (1999): Applying Scenario Optimization to Portfolio Credit Risk, Algo Research Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 2, 19–33.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Mausser, H and D. Rosen (1999): Efficient Risk/Return Frontiers for Credit Risk, Algo Research Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 4, 35–48.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Pflug, G.Ch. (2000): Some Remarks on the Value-at-Risk and the Conditional Value-at-Risk. In.“Probabilistic Constrained Optimization: Methodology and Applications”, Ed. S. Uryasev, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Pritsker, M. (1997): Evaluating Value at Risk Methodologies, Journal of Financial Services Research, 12: 2 /3, 201–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Prekopa, A. (1995) Stochastic Programming,Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Puelz, A. (1999): Value-at-Risk Based Portfolio Optimization. Working paper, Southern Methodist University, November.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    RiskMetricsTM. (1996): Technical Document,4-th Edition, New York, NY, J.P.Morgan Inc., December.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    Tasche, D. (1999): Risk contributions and performance measurement. Working paper, Munich University of Technology (July).Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Wilson, T. (1997a): Portfolio Credit Risk I, Risk, No. 10 (9), 111–117.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Wilson, T. (1997b): Portfolio Credit Risk II, Risk, No. 10 (10), 56–61.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Rockafellar, R.T. and S.Uryasev. (2000): Optimization of Conditional Value-At-Risk. The Journal of Risk, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2000, 21–41.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Rockafellar R.T. and S. Uryasev. (2001): Conditional Value-atRisk for General Loss Distributions. Research Report 2001–5. ISE Dept., University of Florida, April (2001) (Can be downloaded: www.ise.ufl.edu/uryasev/cvar2.pdf)
  37. [37]
    Ziemba, T.W. and M.J. Mulvey Eds. (1998): Worldwide Asset and Liability Modeling, Cambridge Press,Publications of the Newton Institute.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    Yamai, Y. and T. Yoshiba. (2001): On the Validity of Valueat-Risk: Comparative Analyses with Expected Shortfall. Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies. Bank of Japan. IMES Discussion Paper 2001-E-4. (Can be downloaded: www.imes.boj.or.jp/english/publication/edps/fedps2001index.html)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicklas Larsen
    • 1
  • Helmut Mausser
    • 2
  • Stanislav Uryasev
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of Optimization and Systems Theory, Dept. of MathematicsRoyal Institute of Technology (KTH)StockholmSweden
  2. 2.Algorithmics, Inc.TorontoCanada
  3. 3.Dept. of Industrial and Systems EngineeringUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations