What are the axioms of coherence?
A list of properties that a good risk measure should have. A risk measure is coherent if it satisfies the following four axioms:
where Li = probability distribution of losses on a portfolio
F = amount of capital that should be added to a risk portfolio with distribution Li to make it acceptable to the risk controller
Describe the four axioms in words.
What makes a risk measure convex?
F(aL1 + (1-a)L2) <= aF(L1) + (1-a)F(L2)
This is a desirable feature as it means diversification can reduce risk and the amount of capital needed. Convexity follows the axioms of subadditivity and positive homogeneity.
Outline the nature of probabilistic and deterministic risk measures.
Deterministic risk measures are simplistic, giving broad indication of the level of risk.
Probabilistic risk measures are potentially more accurate, but are more complex, and can imply inappropriate levels of confidence.
Outline the three deterministic approaches, and the advantages and disadvantages of each.
1. Notional approach - a broad-brush risk measure. For example, risk weightings might be applied to the market value of assets, then summed and this total compared to the value of liabilities in order to determine a notional financial position. A: - simple to implement and interpret across a diverse range of organisations. D: - potential undesirable use of a catch all weighting, for possibly undefined asset classes - possible distortions to the market caused by increased demand for asset classes with high weightings - treating short positions as if they were the exact opposite of equivalent long position - no allowance for concentration of risk, as risk weightings are the same for an asset class regardless of whether it consists of a single security or variety of securities - probability of changes considered is not quantified
Factor sensitivity approach - determines the degree to which an organisation’s financial position is affected by the impact that a change in a single underlying risk factor has on the value of assets and liabilities.
A: increased understanding of drivers of risk
D: - not assessing a wider range of risks by focusing upon a single risk factor
- being difficult to aggregate over different risk factors
- probability of changes considered is not considered quantified
Scenario sensitivity approach - similar to that of factor sensitivity, but instead of changing one factor the effect of changing a set of factors is considered.
D: probability of the changes considered is not quantified
What are five probabilistic approaches to quantifying risk?
Define deviation.
Deviation is a measure of the spread from a given reference.
Standard deviation - where deviation is measured from the mean.
Tracking error - where deviation is measured relative to a benchmark other than the mean e.g. investment returns measured with reference to a benchmark portfolio
A: - simplicity of calculation
D: - difficulty in interpreting comparisons, other than in terms of simple ranking
Define value at risk (VaR).
The maximum potential loss which is not exceeded with a given high probability over a time period.
I.e. P(L<i></i>
Outline the three general approaches to calculating VaR, along with their advantages and disadvantages.
Empirical approach - rank losses over T time periods from smallest to largest, and derive the VaR based on the confidence percentage required.
A: - it’s simplicity
D: - it’s reliance on boot-strapping past data having captured all possible future scenarios
Parametric approach - assume that losses follow some specified statistical distribution function. Estimates of distributions parameters might be obtained from past data or by using the future volatility implied by option prices.
A: - ease of calculation
D: - more difficult to explain than empirical approach
Stochastic approach - derivation is the same as the empirical approach, but the dataset is not the full set of observed past losses. The dataset may be simulated using a statistical distribution, or bootstrapped via random sampling of past observed returns.
A: - accommodates more complex features of the underlying loss distribution
D: - more difficult to explain than the other two approaches
Define probability of ruin.
The probability that the net financial position of an organisation falls below zero over a specified time horizon. It is linked closely to the VaR, for example, if the net financial position is below the 95% VaR then we can infer that the probability of ruin is greater than 5% over the same time horizon.
Define tail value at risk (TVaR).
The expected loss given a loss over the specified VaR has occurred.
A: - considers the losses over the VaR
- it is a coherent risk measure
D: - the choice of distribution and parameter values is subjective and difficult
- it is highly sensitive to assumptions
Empirical approach - average of losses that are greater than of equal to the VaR.
Parametric approach - takes the mean through a statistical distribution.
Stochastic approach - based on data obtained by simulation or bootstrapping.
Define expected shortfall
Same as TVaR but the average of all losses, not just those that are above the VaR threshold.
Can be calculated using an empirical, parametric or stochastic approach.
A: - considers losses beyond the rail
- is a coherent risk measure
D: - choice of distribution and parameters is subjective and difficult
- highly sensitive to assumptions
- has little intuitive meaning
- cannot next readily linked to the current valuation
What does the ratio of TVaR to VaR indicate?
The skewness of the distribution. A higher ratio indicates the loss distribution is asymmetric with a fatter tail.
Outline the effects of the time horizon, and describe two key factors influencing the choice of a suitable time horizon.
The longer the duration of exposure, the higher the level of the risk - both in terms of the possible outcome and what might happen in the intervening period.
The choice of a suitable time horizon will be influenced by expectations as to:
Outline the role of the risk discount rate and contributing factors.
The size of the discount rate will impact the appraised viability of projects. The higher the discount rate the lower the present value of future earnings.
Discount rates should take into account the sponsors cost of capital, the rate of inflation, interest rates, and returns on investments throughout the economy.
Ultimately the discount rate will depend on issues such as the company’s cost of capital, and any hurdle rates the company sets for investments. Some companies may wish to use higher or lower rates for projects them seem as having higher or lower inherent risk. Risks may change over time if the risk of a project varies significantly over different time periods. Artificially high discount rates chosen as a substitute for more detailed risk analysis should be avoided, as profitable projects may be rejected.
What are the two rules of thumb?
Define CAPM.
rx = rf + Bx(ru - rf)
rx = expected return on a risky asset
rf = risk-free rate of return
ru = expected return on the universe of investment opportunities (existing project portfolio)
Bx = (ox/ou) x px,u
the beta of the asset where o are standard deviations and p is the correlation
On a graph with B on the x-axis and rx on the y-axis, SML has a y-axis intercept of rf and gradient ru - rf
PML is obtained by re-expressing rx as the required return on project X, and re-expressing U as the existing project portfolio. A higher return is required for a project which exposes the organisation to greater uncertainty (ox/ou) and/or has a lower diversification benefit (higher px,u)
Difficult to use PML to determine discount rate as returns on projects and correlations between them may not be stable over their respective lifetimes.