Skip Navigation


Journal of Financial Econometrics Advance Access originally published online on October 12, 2005
Journal of Financial Econometrics 2006 4(1):53-89; doi:10.1093/jjfinec/nbj002
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
4/1/53    most recent
nbj002v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kuester, K.
Right arrow Articles by Paolella, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow G11 - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
Right arrow G32 - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Value-at-Risk Prediction: A Comparison of Alternative Strategies

Keith Kuester
     University of Frankfurt

Stefan Mittnik
     University of Munich, Center for Financial Studies, and Ifo Institute for Economic Research

Marc S. Paolella
     University of Zurich

Address correspondence to Marc Paolella, Swiss Banking Institute, University of Zürich, Plattenstrasse 14, CH-8032, Zürich, Switzerland, or e-mail: paolella{at}isb.unizh.ch.

Given the growing need for managing financial risk, risk prediction plays an increasing role in banking and finance. In this study we compare the out-of-sample performance of existing methods and some new models for predicting value-at-risk (VaR) in a univariate context. Using more than 30 years of the daily return data on the NASDAQ Composite Index, we find that most approaches perform inadequately, although several models are acceptable under current regulatory assessment rules for model adequacy. A hybrid method, combining a heavy-tailed generalized autoregressive conditionally heteroskedastic (GARCH) filter with an extreme value theory-based approach, performs best overall, closely followed by a variant on a filtered historical simulation, and a new model based on heteroskedastic mixture distributions. Conditional autoregressive VaR (CAViaR) models perform inadequately, though an extension to a particular CAViaR model is shown to outperform the others.

KEYWORDS: empirical finance, extreme value theory, fat tails, GARCH, quantile regression

Received March 23, 2004; revised July 18, 2005; accepted September 6, 2005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICSHome page
C. T. Brownlees and G. M. Gallo
Comparison of Volatility Measures: a Risk Management Perspective
J. Financial Econometrics, July 27, 2009; (2009) nbp009v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICSHome page
P. Nyberg and A. Wilhelmsson
Measuring Event Risk
J. Financial Econometrics, July 1, 2009; 7(3): 265 - 287.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICSHome page
J. W. Taylor
Using Exponentially Weighted Quantile Regression to Estimate Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall
J. Financial Econometrics, July 1, 2008; 6(3): 382 - 406.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICSHome page
J. W. Taylor
Estimating Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Using Expectiles
J. Financial Econometrics, April 1, 2008; 6(2): 231 - 252.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.