Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Applied Optimization ((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.

This paper is based on the research project conducted by Nicklas Larsen during his visit to the University of Florida in Spring 2000. This research project has not been conducted in the framework of any legal agreement between the University of Florida and Algorithmic, Inc.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  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. Acerbi, C., and D. Tasche, On the coherence of expected shortfall. Working paper, (2001), (Can be downloaded from http://www.gloriamundi.org).

  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. 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. Artzner, P., Delbaen F., Eber, J.M., and D. Heath (1999) Coherent Measures of Risk. Mathematical Finance, 9, 203–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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. Birge J.R. and F. Louveaux (1997): Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  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. CreditMetrics: The Benchmark for Understanding Credit Risk (1997): Technical Document, J.P.Morgan Inc., New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  10. CreditRisk+: A Credit Risk Management Framework(1997): Credit Suisse Financial Products, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Duffle, D. and J. Pan (1997): An Overview of Value-at-Risk. Journal of Derivatives. 4, 7–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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. Ermoliev, Yu. and R. J-B Wets (Eds.) (1988): Numerical Techniques for Stochastic Optimization,Springer Series in Computational Mathematics, 10.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jorion, Ph. (1996): Value at Risk: A New Benchmark for Measuring Derivatives Risk. Irwin Professional Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  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. 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. 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. Kall, P. and S.W. Wallace (1994) Stochastic Programming. Willey, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  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. 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. Kealhofer, S. (1997): Portfolio Management of Default Risk, KMV Corporation, Document # 999–0000–033, Revision 2. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Markowitz, H.M. (1952): Portfolio Selection. Journal of finance. Vol. 7, 1, 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  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. 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. 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. 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. Pritsker, M. (1997): Evaluating Value at Risk Methodologies, Journal of Financial Services Research, 12: 2 /3, 201–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Prekopa, A. (1995) Stochastic Programming,Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Puelz, A. (1999): Value-at-Risk Based Portfolio Optimization. Working paper, Southern Methodist University, November.

    Google Scholar 

  31. RiskMetricsTM. (1996): Technical Document,4-th Edition, New York, NY, J.P.Morgan Inc., December.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tasche, D. (1999): Risk contributions and performance measurement. Working paper, Munich University of Technology (July).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wilson, T. (1997a): Portfolio Credit Risk I, Risk, No. 10 (9), 111–117.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wilson, T. (1997b): Portfolio Credit Risk II, Risk, No. 10 (10), 56–61.

    Google Scholar 

  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. 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. Ziemba, T.W. and M.J. Mulvey Eds. (1998): Worldwide Asset and Liability Modeling, Cambridge Press,Publications of the Newton Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  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)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stanislav Uryasev .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Larsen, N., Mausser, H., Uryasev, S. (2002). Algorithms for Optimization of Value-at-Risk. In: Pardalos, P.M., Tsitsiringos, V.K. (eds) Financial Engineering, E-commerce and Supply Chain. Applied Optimization, vol 70. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5226-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5226-7_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5222-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-5226-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics