Book contents
- Validation of Risk Management Models for Financial Institutions
- Validation of Risk Management Models for Financial Institutions
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Common Elements in Validation of Risk Models Used in Financial Institutions
- 2 Validating Bank Holding Companies’ Value-at-Risk Models for Market Risk
- 3 A Conditional Testing Approach for Value-at-Risk Model Performance Evaluation
- 4 Beyond Exceedance-Based Backtesting of Value-at-Risk Models: Methods for Backtesting the Entire Forecasting Distribution Using Probability Integral Transform
- 5 Evaluation of Value-at-Risk Models: An Empirical Likelihood Approach
- 6 Evaluating Banks’ Value-at-Risk Models during the COVID-19 Crisis
- 7 Performance Monitoring for Supervisory Stress-Testing Models
- 8 Counterparty Credit Risk
- 9 Validation of Retail Credit Risk Models
- 10 Issues in the Validation of Wholesale Credit Risk Models
- 11 Case Studies in Wholesale Risk Model Validation
- 12 Validation of Models Used by Banks to Estimate Their Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses
- 13 Operational Risk
- 14 Statistical Decisioning Tools for Model Risk Management
- 15 Validation of Risk Aggregation in Economic Capital Models
- 16 Model Validation of Interest Rate Risk (Banking Book) Models
- 17 Validation of Risk Management Models in Investment Management
- Index
- References
7 - Performance Monitoring for Supervisory Stress-Testing Models
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 March 2023
Book contents
- Validation of Risk Management Models for Financial Institutions
- Validation of Risk Management Models for Financial Institutions
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Common Elements in Validation of Risk Models Used in Financial Institutions
- 2 Validating Bank Holding Companies’ Value-at-Risk Models for Market Risk
- 3 A Conditional Testing Approach for Value-at-Risk Model Performance Evaluation
- 4 Beyond Exceedance-Based Backtesting of Value-at-Risk Models: Methods for Backtesting the Entire Forecasting Distribution Using Probability Integral Transform
- 5 Evaluation of Value-at-Risk Models: An Empirical Likelihood Approach
- 6 Evaluating Banks’ Value-at-Risk Models during the COVID-19 Crisis
- 7 Performance Monitoring for Supervisory Stress-Testing Models
- 8 Counterparty Credit Risk
- 9 Validation of Retail Credit Risk Models
- 10 Issues in the Validation of Wholesale Credit Risk Models
- 11 Case Studies in Wholesale Risk Model Validation
- 12 Validation of Models Used by Banks to Estimate Their Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses
- 13 Operational Risk
- 14 Statistical Decisioning Tools for Model Risk Management
- 15 Validation of Risk Aggregation in Economic Capital Models
- 16 Model Validation of Interest Rate Risk (Banking Book) Models
- 17 Validation of Risk Management Models in Investment Management
- Index
- References
Summary
Stress-testing models pose a unique set of challenges with respect to performance monitoring. In particular, unlike standard forecasting models that generate unconditional forecasts, stress-testing models generate conditional forecasts based on stress scenarios that are unlikely to occur. This critical difference greatly limits one’s ability to assess model projections with observed outcomes. We provide several different methods for this purpose
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Validation of Risk Management Models for Financial InstitutionsTheory and Practice, pp. 124 - 155Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Acerbi, C. and Szekely, B. (2019). The Minimally Biased Backtest for Expected Shortfall. Risk, 29, September, 1–6.Google Scholar
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2011). Supervisory Guidance on Model Risk Management. SR Letter 11-7, 4/4/2011.Google Scholar
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, (2013). Capital Planning at Large Bank Holding Companies: Supervisory Expectations and Range of Current Practice.Google Scholar
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, (2016). Dodd–Frank Stress Testing 2016: Supervisory Stress Test Methodology and Results.Google Scholar
Clark, T. and McCracken, M. (2016). Tests of Predictive Ability for Vector Autoregressions Used for Conditional Forecasting. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 32, 533–553.Google Scholar
Deng, A., Hirtle, B. and Kovner, A. (2015). Are BHCs Mimicking the Fed’s Stress Test Results? Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, September 21.Google Scholar
Faust, J. and Wright, J. (2008). Efficient Forecast Tests for Conditional Policy Forecasts. Journal of Econometrics, 146, 293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frame, W. S., Gerardi, K. and Willen, P. S. (2015). The Failure of Supervisory Stress Testing: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and OFHEO. Manuscript, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.Google Scholar
Giacomini, R. and White, H. (2006). Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability. Econometrica, 74, 1545–1578.Google Scholar
Glasserman, P. and Tangirala, G. (2016). Are the Federal Reserve’s Stress Test Results Predictable? Journal of Alternative Investments, 18, 82–97.Google Scholar
Granger, C. W. J. and Huang, L. L. (1997). Evaluation of Panel Data Models: Some Suggestions from Time Series. UCSD Working Paper #97-10.Google Scholar
Hardy, D. C. and Schmieder, C. (2013). Rules of Thumb for Bank Solvency Stress Testing. IMF Working Paper WP/13/232.Google Scholar
Hirtle, B., Kovner, A. and McKay, E. (2014). Becoming More Alike? Comparing Bank and Federal Reserve Stress Test Results. Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, July 21.Google Scholar
Hirtle, B., Kovner, A., and McKay, E., (2015). Are BHC and Federal Reserve Stress Test Results Converging? What Do We Learn from 2015? Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, April 15.Google Scholar
Hughes, T. (2012). Validating Stress-Testing Models. Moody’s Analytics whitepaper, June.Google Scholar
Jan, S. R., Shah, S. T. U., Johar, Z. U., Shah, Y. and Khan, F. (2016). An Innovative Approach to Investigate Various Software Testing Techniques and Strategies. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, 2, 682–689.Google Scholar
Khan, M. E. and Khan, F. (2012). A Comparative Study of White Box, Black Box and Grey Box Testing Techniques. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 3, 12–15.Google Scholar
Patton, A. J. and Timmermann, A. (2010). Monotonicity in Asset Returns: New Tests with Applications to the Term Structure, the CAPM, and Portfolio Sorts. Journal of Financial Economics, 98, 605–625.Google Scholar
Pesaran, M. H. and Smith, R. P. (1985). Evaluation of Macroeconometric Models. Economic Modelling, April, 125–134.Google Scholar
Pesaran, M. H. and Timmermann, A. (2005). Real-Time Econometrics. Econometric Theory, 21, 212–231.Google Scholar
Rajan, U., Seru, A. and Vig, V. (2015). The Failure of Models that Predict Failure: Distance, Incentives, and Defaults. Journal of Financial Economics, 115, 237–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, C. and Romer, D. (2008). The FOMC versus the Staff: Where Can Monetary Policymakers Add Value? American Economic Review, 98, 230–235.Google Scholar
Taleb, N., Canetti, E., Kinda, T., Loukoianova, E. and Schmieder, C. (2012). A New Heuristic Measure of Fragility and Tail Risks: Application to Stress Testing. IMF Working Paper WP/12/216.Google Scholar
Williams, J. C. (2015). Macroprudential Policy in a Microprudential World, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Economic Letter, June 1.Google Scholar