Calmer markets reflected in VAR figures
Lower volatility across asset classes in the second quarter of the year produced lower value-at-risk figures at almost all major banks, according to a Risk survey.
Available figures for major bank VAR over the second quarter of 2009 show an average fall of 13.8% in overall VAR. This result was carried on over most asset classes: interest rate VAR, the largest single category, fell an average of 3.6%; currency VAR fell 8.8%; and equity VAR fell 15.5%. Commodity VAR rose an average of 14.2%, but remained by far the smallest contributor to overall VAR.
This corresponds with a quarter in which measures of volatility across asset classes fell noticeably. The Merrill Lynch Move index, a yield curve-weighted average of the normalised implied volatility of one-month Treasury options, averaged 142.35 for the quarter, down 4.6% from 149.25 in the first quarter of the year. The CBOE Vix index of equity market volatility as implied by 30-day S&P option prices averaged 32.94, down from 45 the quarter before. One measure of commodity price volatility, the CBOE's Crude Oil Volatility Index, also fell significantly, down 33.6% from 73.68 to 48.95. And the Deutsche Bank CVix currency volatility index, which is based on the implied volatility of options on nine major currency pairs, dropped 21.7% from 19.09 to 14.95.
The only exception to the trend was Goldman Sachs, which saw another increase in average VAR over the quarter, as it has done in every quarter save one since mid-2006. Measured at the one-day horizon and a 95% confidence level, the bank's average VAR rose from $240 million to $245 million. The bank noted its VAR figure had increased from 2008 because of higher interest-rate VAR. However, between March and June, this figure actually fell, and the increase over that period was in fact almost entirely due to an increase in equity VAR from $38 million to $60 million.
The bank's equity and principal investment departments performed significantly better in the second quarter than in the first: net equities revenue climbed from $2 billion to $3.18 billion, "reflecting significantly higher net revenues in derivatives and, to a lesser extent, principal strategies", the bank said. It added it had "increased equity exposures" over the course of the second quarter. Principal investments brought in $811 million in the second quarter, compared with a net loss of $1.41 billion in the first quarter, driven mainly by a $948 million gain on its shares in the Chinese bank ICBC.
Meanwhile, very few VAR exceptions (days on which actual loss exceeds VAR) have been reported this year. Morgan Stanley reported one in the first quarter of the year (at 95% confidence and a one-day window) but none in the second, while UBS reported two at 99% confidence over 10 days in the first quarter and another two in the second.
Bank of America, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, all of which have reported exceptions in the past, reported none in 2009 - even though, given their confidence limits, all would have expected, statistically speaking, to report at least one or two, and potentially as many as five.
See also: The risk of value-at-risk
Challenging times for VAR
Quant Congress Europe: VAR models still essential
The year of living riskily
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 print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Credit spread risk: the cryptic peril on bank balance sheets
Some bankers fear EU regulatory push on CSRBB has done little to improve risk management
Credit spread risk approach differs among EU banks, survey finds
KPMG survey of more than 90 banks reveals disagreement on how to treat liabilities and loans
Bowman’s Fed may limp on by after cuts
New vice-chair seeks efficiency, but staff clear-out could hamper functions, say former regulators
Review of 2025: It’s the end of the world, and it feels fine
Markets proved resilient as Trump redefined US policies – but questions are piling up about 2026 and beyond
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance
Could one-off loan losses at US regional banks become systemic?
Investors bet Zions, Western Alliance are isolated problems, but credit risk managers are nervous