Skip to main content

The false promise of expected shortfall

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has proposed using expected shortfall instead of value-at-risk as the central metric for regulatory market risk capital. David Rowe argues this will be both ineffective and dangerous

david-rowe

So much ink has been spilled over the strengths and weaknesses of value-at-risk that it seems pointless to restate them at length here. In brief, my view is that VAR was a major advance over the disjointed framework of non-commensurable limits that preceded its introduction. It addressed the issue of exposure to short-term market fluctuations in a consistent way. What it did not do, and never

Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.

To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

Want to know what’s included in our free membership? Click here

Show password
Hide password

Most read articles loading...

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here