Flexible estimation of risk metric using copula model for the joint severity-frequency loss framework

Predictive analytics and data fusion techniques are being regularly used for analysis in Quantitative Risk Management (QRM). The primary risk metric of interest, Value-at-Risk (VaR), has always been difficult to robustly estimate for different data types. The classical Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) approach (denoted henceforth as classical approach) assumes the independence of loss severity and loss frequency. In practice, this assumption may not always hold. To overcome this limitation and more robustly estimate the corresponding VaR, we propose a new approach known as Copula-based Parametric Modeling of Frequency and Severity (CPFS). The proposed approach is verified via large-scale MCS experiments and validated on three publicly available datasets. We compare CPFS with the classical approach and a Data-driven Partitioning of Frequency and Severity (DPFS) approach for robust VaR estimation. We observe that the classical approach estimates VaR poorly while both the DPFS and the CPFS methodologies attain VaR estimates for real-world data. These studies provide real-world evidence that the CPFS and DPFS methodologies have merits for its use to accurately estimate VaR.

[1]  Dawn Hunter Operational risk quantification using extreme value theory and copulas: from theory to practice , 2009 .

[2]  K. C. Chang,et al.  An application of data fusion techniques in quantitative operational risk management , 2015, 2015 18th International Conference on Information Fusion (Fusion).

[3]  Kabir K. Dutta,et al.  A Tale of Tails: An Empirical Analysis of Loss Distribution Models for Estimating Operational Risk Capital , 2006 .

[4]  Marno Verbeek,et al.  Selecting Copulas for Risk Management , 2006 .

[5]  Jiandong Ren,et al.  Recursions and Fast Fourier Transforms for Certain Bivariate Compound Distributions , 2010 .

[6]  Jie Xu,et al.  Robust estimation of value-at-risk through correlated frequency and severity model , 2016, 2016 19th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION).

[7]  Johan Segers,et al.  Discussion of “Copulas: Tales and facts”, by Thomas Mikosch , 2006 .

[8]  Roberto Ugoccioni,et al.  Sources of uncertainty in modeling operational risk losses , 2006 .

[9]  N. Kolev,et al.  Copulas: A Review and Recent Developments , 2006 .

[10]  Eric S. Rosengren,et al.  Using Loss Data to Quantify Operational Risk , 2003 .

[11]  Carolyn Moclair Applying robust methods to operational risk modeling , 2006 .

[12]  Georges Dionne,et al.  Scaling Models for the Severity and Frequency of External Operational Loss Data , 2007 .

[13]  Michael Giering,et al.  Parametric Characterization of Multimodal Distributions with Non-gaussian Modes , 2011, 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops.

[14]  Dawn Hunter Modeling correlated frequencies with application in operational risk management , 2015 .

[15]  P. Rousseeuw Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis , 1987 .

[16]  Thierry Roncalli,et al.  Loss Distribution Approach in Practice , 2007 .

[17]  Sabyasachi Guharay,et al.  Methodological and Empirical Investigations in Quantification of Modern Operational Risk Management , 2016 .

[18]  J. D. Opdyke,et al.  Estimating operational risk capital: the challenges of truncation, the hazards of maximum likelihood estimation, and the promise of robust statistics , 2012 .

[19]  Olivier Scaillet,et al.  Kernel Based Goodness-of-Fit Test for Copulas with Fixed Smoothing Parameters , 2005 .

[20]  Bruno Rémillard,et al.  Discussion of “Copulas: Tales and facts”, by Thomas Mikosch , 2006 .

[21]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[22]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[23]  J. MacQueen Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations , 1967 .