Adjusting VAR to correct sample volatility bias
The calculation of value-at-risk often relies on using a sample variance for that of the forward-looking distribution. However, using an unbiased estimate of variance leads to biased estimates of VAR. David Frank proposes an adjustment that can be easily retrofitted into existing models to correct for this bias
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE PDF
In this article, we propose a simple adjustment that can be used when computing value-at-risk (RiskMetrics Group 1996) if a sample standard deviation of returns rather than the true standard deviation is employed. Using the sample standard deviation as if it were the true standard deviation (the usual procedure) results in VAR estimates that are biased downwards. We
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
Risk managers question US reach of Dora third-party list
Some EU subsidiaries included, but regulator control over cloud providers could still be limited
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
BofA urges horizontal CCP fix after CME outage, others demur
Analysts say clearing meltdown bolsters case for futures-for-futures exchange with FMX
One in five banks targets a 30-day liquidity survival horizon
ALM Benchmarking research finds wide divergence in liquidity risk appetites, even among large lenders
Bank ALM tech still dominated by manual workflows
Batch processing and Excel files still pervade, with only one in four lenders planning tech upgrades
Many banks ignore spectre of SVB in liquidity stress tests
In ALM Benchmarking exercise, majority of banks have no internal tests focusing on stress horizons of less than 30 days
Quant Finance Master’s Guide 2026
Risk.net’s guide to the world’s leading quant master’s programmes, with the top 25 schools ranked
ALM Benchmarking: explore the data
View interactive charts from Risk.net’s 46-bank study, covering ALM governance, balance-sheet strategy, stress-testing, technology and regulation
