Back-testing expected shortfall
The discovery that expected shortfall (ES) is not elicitable propagated the belief that it could not be back-tested and aroused a number of criticisms of the Basel Committee’s adoption of ES over value-at-risk. In this article, Carlo Acerbi and Balázs Székely propose three back-testing methodologies for ES that are more powerful than the Basel VAR test, and observe that elicitability is irrelevant when it comes to the choice of a regulatory risk standard
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE ARTICLE IN FULL
Risk professionals had never heard of elicitability before 2011, when Gneiting (2011) proved that expected shortfall (ES) is not elicitable, unlike value-at-risk. This result sparked a confusing debate.
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 Risk management
Rethinking model validation for GenAI governance
A US model risk leader outlines how banks can recalibrate existing supervisory standards
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
The changing shape of variation margin collateral
Financial firms are open to using a wider variety of collateral when posting VM on uncleared derivatives, but concerns are slowing efforts to use more non-cash alternatives
Repo clearing: expanding access, boosting resilience
Michel Semaan, head of RepoClear at LSEG, discusses evolving requirements in repo clearing
The state of IMA: great expectations meet reality
Latest trading book rules overhaul internal models approach, but most banks are opting out. Two risk experts explore why
How geopolitical risk turned into a systemic stress test
Conflict over resources is reshaping markets in a way that goes beyond occasional risk premia
Many banks see obstacles to options-based IRRBB hedging
Liquidity, accounting treatment and culture seen as impediments to wider use of swaptions, caps and floors
