Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Stress Testing of Portfol 102727747
Stress Testing of Portfol 102727747
Agenda
Motivation Methodology Overview Alternative Approaches Empirical Analysis Dynamic Correlations Stressed Betas Application to Portfolio Construction Further Conditioning on the Matrix Out-of-Sample Testing Confidence Intervals Conclusions Future Extensions
Motivation
Scenario analysis: typically views on a small set of market variables Need to estimate the relationships among all market variables under specified scenario Use a Covariance Matrix to estimate scenario returns of other variables Under stressed scenarios Current matrix is unlikely to represent the potential behavior of market variables
Correlation Between S&P 500 and Barclays Capital US Treasury Index
0.0
-0.1 -0.2 -0.3 -0.4 -0.5 Q5 Q4:Q5 Q3:Q5 Cumulative VIX quintiles Q2:Q5 Q1:Q5
Methodology Description
A simple and generic methodology that addresses these issues and provides intuitive results
Estimate the correlations by dynamically weighting historical data Distance function between the scenario and each historical observation Assign a weight to each observation based on that distance Compute the weighted correlation matrix Limited by historical data US Credit Spread 47.7% -0.9% 1.7% 19.2% 11.4% 21.5% 28.0% -17.6% -2.8% 8.7%
Step 1
Month Aug-98 Feb-09 Aug-90 Nov-08 Jun-08 Jul-02 Sep-01 Jan-09 Jan-90 Sep-02
Weight 2.8% 2.5% 2.1% 2.0% 1.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3%
US Equity -12.6% -10.9% -9.9% -9.6% -8.6% -8.0% -7.9% -7.5% -7.0% -7.0%
UK Equity -12.5% -4.8% -7.0% -3.8% -8.4% -10.0% -12.2% -2.8% -3.5% -9.1%
Methodology Description
Step 1
Step 2
Update volatilities Stressed volatility is a function of the size of the shock Not limited by historical data Compute the covariance matrix from the above Further manipulate this matrix if needed
Step 3
Step 4
Alternative Approaches
Construct a custom covariance matrix for each scenario Preserving the positive definiteness of the matrix Make them consistent across scenarios Hard to generalize Move sample covariance matrix towards a target Mixture of distributions/regime shift/latent factors Hard to incorporate complex dynamics Use a matrix from a historical crisis episode Results depend on the very specific episode chosen Possible for a restricted set of factors Search for risk factors with more stable conditional correlations
PORTFOLIO I: Multi-asset class US portfolio with equal weights in Barclays Capital US Treasury Index Barclays Capital US Credit Index Barclays Capital US HY Caa Index S&P 500 Index Barclays Capital US Commodity Index
Data Period: 1990-2011 Using 10 different scenarios on the US Equity market (shocks from -5 to +4 stdev) Compute the conditional covariance matrix for each scenario Analyze the portfolio statistics conditional on each scenario
Portfolio I Correlations
Average Absolute Correlation across Factors
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2 -5 -4 -3
Scenario Weighted
-2
-1
2
Equal Weighted
Portfolio I Correlations
Correlation between US Equity Market and Other Factors
1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1.0 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
YC slope
Credit spread
Commodity
Distressed
Varying behavior across different factors Correlations move to 1 under the extreme scenario
-5
Portfolio return is non-linear (due to dynamic correlations and volatilities) Hedge ratio depends on the size of the move Reverse stress testing How large of an equity shock would result in a 10% loss in the portfolio?
10
Scenario weighted: -5 stdev. US equity shock Using the correlation matrix most diversified portfolio, long-only positions, 5% minimum weight Increasing allocation to short Treasuries
11
How can we construct an appropriate matrix for this scenario? Option 1 Construct a multi-variate scenario-weighted correlation matrix Problem: Limited historical evidence for this scenario Option 2 Construct a stressed matrix consistent with the univariate EMG equity shock When equity markets plummet, commodity prices tend to follow Manipulate the matrix to imply an appropriate rise in commodity prices
12
-2
0.4
Portfolio Beta
-4
0.3
-6
0.2
-12
EMG Equity Market Shock in Stdev Scenario Weighted Manipulated Scenario Weighted Original
EMG Equity Market Shock in Stdev Scenario Weighted Manipulated Scenario Weighted Original
Significant difference between the two matrices Commodity component of the portfolio acts as a diversifier under this specific scenario
13
14
Portfolio II Correlations
Average Absolute Correlation across Factors
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Equal Weighted
Flight-to-quality effect across different regions within the same asset class
15
Portfolio II Correlations
Correlation between the US Equity Market and Other Regions
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
16
Portfolio II Correlations
The impact of a shock in the US equity market on the Japanese equities versus the impact of a shock in the Japanese equity market on the US equities Another type of asymmetry that cannot be captured by the static model
The Impact of Shocks in the US and Japanese EQ Markets to Each Other
0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
17
Out-of-Sample Testing
Daily data on 10 factors from FX, yield curve, equity, commodity, credit Data period: 1987-2011 For all days starting from 2000 where US EQ < -3 stdev (24 episodes) Assume perfect foresight on US equity market return Estimate all factor realizations using scenario versus equal weighted matrix Absolute error for each estimate |estimate actual realization|/stdev Compare the median absolute error between the two matrices
18
Out-of-Sample Testing
Median Absolute Error Using Scenario vs. Equal Weighted Matrix
3.0 2.8 Median Absolute Error in Stdev (Cumulative) 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 -7.5 -7.2 -5.7 -5.1 -4.7 -4.3 -4.0 -3.9 -3.6 -3.6 -3.5 -3.2
Larger differences as we move to the extremes Differences are statistically significant at 5% level
19
Asymmetry of betas On the upside, many cannot be distinguished from zero Efficacy of different factors as potential hedges Similar stressed betas to equities Very different confidence intervals Potentially very different hedging results
20
Conclusions
Methodology Highlights Captures increasing correlations and volatilities under distressed conditions Captures asymmetries in the dependence structure Generic solution for all types of scenarios Easy to interpret: Reshuffled exponential weighting
21
Future Extensions
Relationship with tail risk Upside diversification versus downside concentration Asymmetric weighting function Incorporating confidence in views Implications for portfolio construction Optimal allocations Hedging Diversification
22
23
24
25