Search results

The specific criteria to the microstructure of emerging markets such as low liquidity, very pronounced asymmetric information, and high volatility affect the risk market. Previous researchers have concluded that the calculation methods of the Value‐at‐Risk (VaR) adopted in developed markets are poorly adapted to the specific structure of emerging markets. The purpose of this paper is to see what these specific criteria of emerging markets are and whether these criteria have any impact on market risk and hedging capital. A second purpose it to see if practitioners should adjust the tools of risk measurement to the specifications of emerging markets and how the Value‐at‐Risk (VaR) should be adjusted.

The paper asks what are the specific criteria to the microstructure of emerging markets? Should we adjust the tools of risk measurement to these specifications? How do we adjust the Value‐at‐Risk (VaR)?

The paper demonstrated a market improvement in the performance of adjusted VaR. Indeed, models for measuring the VaR adjusted to liquidity and to asymmetry of information are accepted by the tests of backtesting. The term of average error has decreased.

This improvement of adjusted VaR in the performance of measuring risk implies a better estimation of the capital allocated to cover market risk.

The results from this empirical study offer an alternative approach adapted to the specific structure of emerging markets and a better estimation of the capital allocated to cover market risk.

Given the rising need for measuring and controlling of financial risk as proposed in Basel II and Basel III Capital Adequacy Accords, trading risk assessment under illiquid market conditions plays an increasing role in banking and financial sectors, particularly in emerging financial markets. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate asset liquidity risk and to obtain a Liquidity-Adjusted Value at Risk (L-VaR) estimation for various equity portfolios. The assessment of L-VaR is performed by implementing three different asset liquidity models within a multivariate context along with GARCH-M method (to estimate expected returns and conditional volatility) and by applying meaningful financial and operational constraints. Using more than six years of daily return dataset of emerging Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) stock markets, we find that under certain trading strategies, such as short selling of stocks, the sensitivity of L-VaR statistics are rather critical to the selected internal liquidity model in addition to the degree of correlation factors among trading assets. As such, the effects of extreme correlations (plus or minus unity) are crucial aspects to consider in selecting the most adequate internal liquidity model for economic capital allocation, especially under crisis condition and/or when correlations tend to switch sings. This chapter bridges the gap in risk management literatures by providing real-world asset allocation tactics that can be used for trading portfolios under adverse markets’ conditions. The approach to computing L-VaR has been arrived at through the application of three distinct liquidity models and the obtained results are used to draw conclusions about the relative liquidity of the diverse equity portfolios.

This paper aims to examine from commodity portfolio managers’ perspective the performance of liquidity adjusted risk modeling in assessing the market risk parameters of a large commodity portfolio and in obtaining efficient and coherent portfolios under different market circumstances.

The implemented market risk modeling algorithm and investment portfolio analytics using reinforcement machine learning techniques can simultaneously handle risk-return characteristics of commodity investments under regular and crisis market settings besides considering the particular effects of the time-varying liquidity constraints of the multiple-asset commodity portfolios.

In particular, the paper implements a robust machine learning method to commodity optimal portfolio selection and within a liquidity-adjusted value-at-risk (LVaR) framework. In addition, the paper explains how the adapted LVaR modeling algorithms can be used by a commodity trading unit in a dynamic asset allocation framework for estimating risk exposure, assessing risk reduction alternates and creating efficient and coherent market portfolios.

The optimization parameters subject to meaningful operational and financial constraints, investment portfolio analytics and empirical results can have important practical uses and applications for commodity portfolio managers particularly in the wake of the 2007–2009 global financial crisis. In addition, the recommended reinforcement machine learning optimization algorithms can aid in solving some real-world dilemmas under stressed and adverse market conditions (e.g. illiquidity, switching in correlations factors signs, nonlinear and non-normal distribution of assets’ returns) and can have key applications in machine learning, expert systems, smart financial functions, internet of things (IoT) and financial technology (FinTech) in big data ecosystems.

This study aims to examine the theoretical foundations for multivariate portfolio optimization algorithms under illiquid market conditions. In this study, special emphasis is devoted to the application of a risk-engine, which is based on the contemporary concept of liquidity-adjusted value-at-risk (LVaR), to multivariate optimization of investment portfolios.

This paper examines the modeling parameters of LVaR technique under event market settings and discusses how to integrate asset liquidity risk into LVaR models. Finally, the authors discuss scenario optimization algorithms for the assessment of structured investment portfolios and present a detailed operational methodology for computer programming purposes and prospective research design with the backing of a graphical flowchart.

To that end, the portfolio/risk manager can specify different closeout horizons and dependence measures and calculate the necessary LVaR and resulting investable portfolios. In addition, portfolio managers can compare the return/risk ratio and asset allocation of obtained investable portfolios with different liquidation horizons in relation to the conventional Markowitz´s mean-variance approach.

The examined optimization algorithms and modeling techniques have important practical applications for portfolio management and risk assessment, and can have many uses within machine learning and artificial intelligence, expert systems and smart financial applications, financial technology (FinTech), and within big data environments. In addition, it provide key real-world implications for portfolio/risk managers, treasury directors, risk management executives, policymakers and financial regulators to comply with the requirements of Basel III best practices on liquidly risk.

The proposed optimization algorithms can aid in advancing portfolios selection and management in financial markets by assessing investable portfolios subject to meaningful operational and financial constraints. Furthermore, the robust risk-algorithms and portfolio optimization techniques can aid in solving some real-world dilemmas under stressed and adverse market conditions, such as the effect of liquidity when it dries up in financial and commodity markets, the impact of correlations factors when there is a switching in their signs and the integration of the influence of the nonlinear and non-normal distribution of assets’ returns in portfolio optimization and management.

This paper aims to empirically test, from a regulatory portfolio management standpoint, the application of liquidity-adjusted risk techniques in the process of getting optimum and investable economic-capital structures in the Gulf Cooperation Council financial markets, subject to applying various operational and financial optimization restrictions under crisis outlooks.

The author implements a robust methodology to assess regulatory economic-capital allocation in a liquidity-adjusted value at risk (LVaR) context, mostly from the standpoint of investable portfolios analytics that have long- and short-sales asset allocation or for those portfolios that contain long-only asset allocation. The optimization route is accomplished by controlling the nonlinear quadratic objective risk function with certain regulatory constraints along with LVaR-GARCH-M (1,1) procedure to forecast conditional risk parameters and expected returns for multiple asset classes.

The author’s conclusions emphasize that the attained investable economic-capital portfolios lie-off the efficient frontier, yet those long-only portfolios seem to lie near the efficient frontier than portfolios with long- and short-sales assets allocation. In effect, the newly observed market microstructures forms and derived deductions were not apparent in prior research studies (Al Janabi, 2013).

The attained empirical results are quite interesting for practical portfolio optimization, within the environments of big data analytics, reinforcement machine learning, expert systems and smart financial applications. Furthermore, it is quite promising for multiple-asset portfolio management techniques, performance measurement and improvement analytics, reinforcement machine learning and operations research algorithms in financial institutions operations, above all after the consequences of the 2007–2009 financial crisis.

While this paper builds on Al Janabi’s (2013) optimization algorithms and modeling techniques, it varies in the sense that it covers the outcomes of a multi-asset portfolio optimization method under severe event market scenarios and by allowing for both long-only and combinations of long-/short-sales multiple asset. The achieved empirical results, optimization parameters and efficient and investable economic-capital figures were not apparent in Al Janabi’s (2013) paper because the prior evaluation were performed under normal market circumstances and without bearing in mind the impacts of the 2007–2009 global financial crunch.

The purpose of this paper is to originate a proactive approach for the quantification and analysis of liquidity risk for trading portfolios that consist of multiple equity assets.

The paper presents a coherent modeling method whereby the holding periods are adjusted according to the specific needs of each trading portfolio. This adjustment can be attained for the entire portfolio or for any specific asset within the equity trading portfolio. This paper extends previous approaches by explicitly modeling the liquidation of trading portfolios, over the holding period, with the aid of an appropriate scaling of the multiple‐assets' liquidity‐adjusted value‐at‐risk matrix. The key methodological contribution is a different and less conservative liquidity scaling factor than the conventional root‐t multiplier.

The proposed coherent liquidity multiplier is a function of a predetermined liquidity threshold, defined as the maximum position which can be unwound without disturbing market prices during one trading day, and is quite straightforward to put into practice even by very large financial institutions and institutional portfolio managers. Furthermore, it is designed to accommodate all types of trading assets held and its simplicity stems from the fact that it focuses on the time‐volatility dimension of liquidity risk instead of the cost spread (bid‐ask margin) as most researchers have done heretofore.

Using more than six years of daily return data, for the period 2004‐2009, of emerging Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) stock markets, the paper analyzes different structured and optimum trading portfolios and determine coherent risk exposure and liquidity risk premium under different illiquid and adverse market conditions and under the notion of different correlation factors.

This paper fills a main gap in market and liquidity risk management literatures by putting forward a thorough modeling of liquidity risk under the supposition of illiquid and adverse market settings. The empirical results are interesting in terms of theory as well as practical applications to trading units, asset management service entities and other financial institutions. This coherent modeling technique and empirical tests can aid the GCC financial markets and other emerging economies in devising contemporary internal risk models, particularly in light of the aftermaths of the recent sub‐prime financial crisis.

Stresses that recent changes in financial markets have involved the payment system and the banking processes directly devoted to short term forecasting. Proposes that financial flows control systems must be adopted that can measure performance and liquidity risks consistent with the models often used for credit and market risks.

This paper aims to present a framework enriching currency risk analyses based on information theory.

Information-theoretic measures of predictability (entropy rate) and co-dependence (mutual information) are used to enhance existing methods of analysing and measuring currency risk.

The currency exchange rates have varying degrees of predictability, which should be accounted for in currency risk analyses. In case of baskets of currencies, a network approach rooted in portfolio theory may be useful.

The currency exchange rate time series must be discretised for the information-theoretic analysis (although the results are robust). An agent-based simulation may be a necessary further study to show what the impact of accounting for predictability in managing currency risk is.

Practical analyses measuring currency risk should take predictability of currency rate changes into account wherever the currency exposure is actively managed.

The paper introduces predictability into measuring currency risk, which has previously been ignored, despite the nature of the risk being inherently tied to uncertainty of the currency rate changes. The paper also introduces a portfolio theory-based approach to quantifying currency risk, which accounts for non-linear co-dependence in the currency markets.

In 1997, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued new disclosure rules in an amendment to Regulation S‐X. This release requires the disclosure of both qualitative and quantitative information about market risk by all companies registered with the SEC for annual periods ending after 15 June 1998. Larger companies, with market capitalizations in excess of $2.5 billion, banks, and thrifts were required to apply the regulation’s provisions for annual periods after 15 June 1997. This paper presents results of an analysis of the market risk disclosures by the Dow 30 companies for 1997. The provisions of the amendment requiring the disclosure of qualitative information about market risk by were generally followed by all of the companies contained in the DOW 30. Compliance with the other aspects of the amendment was mixed. These failures might be attributed to confusion over the provisions of the amendment. The results of this study indicate that further evidence is needed on the ability of companies to follow the provisions of the amendment.