2018
DOI: 10.3390/risks6040121
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Nonparametric Measures of Extreme Equity Risk Change the Parametric Ordinal Ranking? Evidence from Asia

Abstract: There has been much discussion in the literature about how central measures of equity risk such as standard deviation fail to account for extreme tail risk of equities. Similarly, parametric measures of value at risk (VaR) may also fail to account for extreme risk as they assume a normal distribution which is often not the case in practice. Nonparametric measures of extreme risk such as nonparametric VaR and conditional value at risk (CVaR) have often been found to overcome this problem by measuring actual tai… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 28 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We then used these Creditworthiness distressed and Conditions distressed values to calculate KM distressed (=Leverage 2014 × Conditions 2014 /Conditions distressed ), CSI distressed , (=KM distressed /Creditworthiness distressed ) and Zone distressed for each bank. As shown in Table 3, applying these factors to our model achieved a 99% level of confidence similarity to the Federal Reserve tests in the rankings of banks (best to worst), using a Spearman ranking correlation test which compares the relative ordinal risk of observations across datasets (Powell et al 2018). A key difference is that, whereas the Federal Reserve results issued every bank with a pass based on a pass/fail grading, our traffic light system, with its additional 'caution' (orange) category, classified 25% of banks (five banks) as orange.…”
Section: Results For Individual Banks Compared To Federal Reserve Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We then used these Creditworthiness distressed and Conditions distressed values to calculate KM distressed (=Leverage 2014 × Conditions 2014 /Conditions distressed ), CSI distressed , (=KM distressed /Creditworthiness distressed ) and Zone distressed for each bank. As shown in Table 3, applying these factors to our model achieved a 99% level of confidence similarity to the Federal Reserve tests in the rankings of banks (best to worst), using a Spearman ranking correlation test which compares the relative ordinal risk of observations across datasets (Powell et al 2018). A key difference is that, whereas the Federal Reserve results issued every bank with a pass based on a pass/fail grading, our traffic light system, with its additional 'caution' (orange) category, classified 25% of banks (five banks) as orange.…”
Section: Results For Individual Banks Compared To Federal Reserve Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%