Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II)

New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II) New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II) 1) 1) 2) Dietmar Pfeifer , Andreas Mändle , and Olena Ragulina 1) Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Germany and 2) Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine October 23, 2017 Abstract: We present a constructive and self-contained approach to data driven infinite parti- tion-of-unity copulas that were recently introduced in the literature. In particular, we consider negative binomial and Poisson copulas and present a solution to the problem of fitting such copulas to highly asymmetric data in arbitrary dimensions. Key words: copulas, partition-of-unity, tail dependence, asymmetry AMS Classification: 62H05, 62H12, 62H17, 62H20 1. Introduction Infinite partition-of-unity copulas have been introduced recently in the paper by Pfeifer et al. (2016). The main emphasis there was, however, on a particular symmetric case called diagonal dominance for which tail dependence coefficients could be explicitly calculated. The general asymmetric case was not treated in full detail. Our particular interest here is to complete the general setup with a suggestion how a data driven approach can be used to fit such copulas to highly asymmetric data in arbitrary dimensions, a ques- tion that had remained open so far. 2. A formal framework for infinite partition-of-unity copulas Assume that {j () u } for kd=Î 1, , represent discrete distributions over  with a parameter ki iÎ uÎ (0,1), i.e. j () u ³0 and j () u =1 for uÎ (0,1), ki å ki i=0 with aj:(=> ud) u 0 for iÎ . ki ki Let further { p} represent the distribution of an arbitrary discrete d-dimensional random vector Z + d iÎ +d over  where, for simplicity, we write i=(ii ,,  ), and 1 d +d Pp (Zi== ) ,. iÎ Suppose further that for the marginal distributions, there holds PZ( == i) a,, iÎ k=1, ,d. kki Then p d cu ()uu :== j ( ),u ,,uÎ 0,1 (1) ()( ) å  ki,1 k d + d iÎ k=1  ki , k=1 defines the density of a d-variate copula, which is called infinite partition-of-unity copula (IPU-copula for short). Alternatively, we can rewrite (1) as cp ()uu== f (u ), ()u ,,uÎ(0,1) (2) i ki,1 k d + d k=1 iÎ j () ki where the f () =Î ,ik ,=1,,d denote the Lebesgue densities induced by the {j () u } . ki ki iÎ ki A stochastic representation of the probability distribution induced by (1) or (2) is given by the random vector UZ== UZU ,, Z : ,,U (with Z as above) with stochastically independent ran- () ( ) () 1 dd 1,Z ,Z 1 d dom variables Uk|1=Î , ,d,i (also independent of Z) where the distribution of U is induced {} ki ki j () ki by the density f () =Î ,ik ,=1,,d. Z is called the driver of the IPU copula with density ki ki given in (1). The following two classes of IPU copulas have been investigated in detail in Pfeifer et al. (2016), among others: Example 1 (negative binomial copula): Let, for fixed integers a > 0, æö ai+-1 NB k i a + ç k j ()uu =÷ (1-u) for ki , Î and uÎ (0,1). (3) ki ç ÷ èø NB NB k Here we have aj== () udu which corresponds to a discrete analogy of a ki ki () ai++(ai+1) kk NB Pareto distribution. The densities f are those of a beta distribution with parameters (ia++ 1, 1). The ki k corresponding copula density is thus given by dd æö ai++1 ad NB kk i k ç k ca ()uu =+ ( 1) p u() 1-u , Î(0,1) (4) kk i k ç ÷ + d i èø kk== 11 iÎ k with p == PZ i = ,, iÎ k=1, ,d. () ik  k k () ai++(ai+1) kk kk Example 2 (Poisson copula): Let, for Lu ():=-ln(1-u)>0, uÎ(0,1) and fixed parameters a > 0, ii aL() u P k j ()uu =- (1 ) (5) ki i ! æöæ ö aa PP kk÷÷ çç ÷÷ Here we have aj== () udu 1- , representing geometric distributions over  . çç ki ki ò ÷÷ çç çç÷÷ aa++ 11 èøè ø kk Lu () i+1 a The densities f are those of a transformed gamma distribution with f ()ua=+ ( 1) (1-u) ki ki k i ! for , kiÎ and uÎ (0,1). The corresponding copula density is thus given by dd a +1 () id P ki k ca ()uu =+ ( 1) p L ()u (1-u) , Î(0,1) (6) kk i k + d i ! kk== 11 iÎ k æöæ ö aa a ÷÷ + ççkk k with p == PZ i = ÷÷1, - = iÎ,k=1,,d. ()çç ik  k k ÷÷ i +1 çç k çç÷÷ aa++ 11 (a+1) èøè ø kk k Note that a random variable X with density f can be represented as X =- 1 exp(-Y ), where Y ki ki ki ki ki follows a gamma distribution with shape parameter i+1 and scale parameter a +1. In Pfeifer et al. (2016), essentially the symmetrical case, i.e. the case of identical components of the driver Z was considered (so called diagonal dominance). This means that the copula induced by the d- variate distribution of Z is given by the upper Fréchet bound Cu ()uu=Î min ,u , (0,1) . In the () 1, d two-dimensional case, the above formulas simplify to a great extent. In particular, it was proved that the negative binomial copula for arbitrary aa==a> 0 has a positive tail dependence coefficient given by æö 2a NB cu (,v)dudv òò ç ÷ èø 1 tt l (aa )== lim 1-  1- for large . (7) t1 14 - t pa The Poisson copula, in contrast, has no tail dependence for all choices aa==a> 0 although the den- sity given by (6) is unbounded and has a pole in the point (uv , )= (1,1). density of a bivariate negative binomial copula, a= 5 density of a bivariate Poisson copula, a= 5 So far the question remained open how such copulas could be fitted to highly asymmetric data in arbitrary dimensions. In the sequel, we shall give a constructive answer to this problem. 3. Constructing infinite partition-of-unity copulas from given data The general idea here is to relate the p , which essentially determine the structure of the IPU cop- {} + d iÎ ula, to the empirical copula given by the data observed in an appropriate way. Let, for this purpose, de- note C a copula that is suitably estimated from the empirical copula, like a Bernstein copula, a rook cop- ula (cf. Cottin and Pfeifer (2014)), appropriate shuffles of M (cf. Nelsen (2006), section 3.2.3) or other patchwork copulas that can be easily simulated by Monte Carlo methods (cf. Durante and Fernández- Sánchez (2010) or Durante et al. (2013)). Let further denote F the cumulative distribution function in- ˆˆ ˆ duced by the discrete distribution a , i.e. Fi ()=Î a , i  . If U=UU ,,  denotes a stochas- () k· kkj 1 d j=0 -1 ˆ ˆ tic representation of C, set Z :=FU for kd = 1, , . Then Z=() Z ,,  Z is an appropriate driver () kk k 1 d for a data-driven IPU copula. For the examples given above, the resulting formulas are quite simple. êú aU -1 kk ˆ êú ê ú Example 1: ZF== U , where zx=Î max{}  |x£z (round down). () kk k ë û êú 1-U ëû êú ˆ -- ln(1 U ) -1 ˆ êú Example 2: ZF== U . () kk k êú ln(aa +- 1) ln kk ëû This follows immediately from standard arguments in Monte Carlo theory: in Example 1, we have êú ˆ æö aU ii+1 ii+1 kk ç ˆ ˆ êú Z== i iff £< U , with probabilities PZ()== i P £U < ÷ k k kk êú ç ç ÷ 1-U ai++ ai+1 ai++ ai+1 èø k kk kk ëû = for iÎ , as desired. () ai++(ai+1) kk ii+1 ê ˆ ú æö æö -- ln(1 U ) aa -1 ÷÷ k ççkk ˆ ˆ ê ú In Example 2, we have Z== FU =i iff 11 -£÷÷ U<- , çç () kkk k ÷÷ ê ú çç çç÷÷ ln(aa +- 1) ln aa++ 11 èø èø kk kk ë û ii+1 i æö æö æö æöæ ö ç aa a a a ÷÷ ÷ ÷ ççkk ÷ k çkç k with probabilities PZ()== i P1- ÷÷ £U <1- = = ÷1- ÷ çç ÷ ç ç kk ç ÷÷ i+1 ÷ ÷ çç ç ç ççç÷÷ ç ÷ç ÷ aa++ 11 ÷(a+1) a+1 a+1 èø èø ÷ èøè ø kk k k k èø for , iÎ as desired. The method proposed here allows for a great flexibility concerning the construction of data-driven IPU copulas, including cases with positive tail dependence. We discuss this here along the example given in Cottin and Pfeifer (2014), Example 4.2, which was also the basis for the discussion in Pfeifer et al. (2016), Section 4. The following table shows the original data x y and the corresponding rank vectors rr,. () () ii 12ii x y r r i i 1i 2i 1 0.468 0.966 4 9 2 9.951 2.679 20 20 3 0.866 0.897 8 4 4 6.731 2.249 19 19 5 1.421 0.956 13 8 6 2.040 1.141 17 15 7 2.967 1.707 18 18 8 1.200 1.008 11 10 9 0.426 1.065 3 12 graph of original data 10 1.946 1.162 15 16 11 0.676 0.918 5 6 12 1.184 1.336 10 17 13 0.960 0.933 9 7 14 1.972 1.077 16 13 15 1.549 1.041 14 11 16 0.819 0.899 6 5 17 0.063 0.710 1 1 18 1.280 1.118 12 14 19 0.824 0.894 7 3 20 0.227 0.837 2 2 graph of rank vectors The following graphs show 5,000 Monte Carlo simulations each from different constructions of data- driven IPU copulas (small dots), with a superposition of the empirical copula (scaled rank vectors) as lar- ge white points. The symmetric cases (negative binomial and Poisson copulas) were constructed accord- ing to the suggestions in Pfeifer et al. (2016), Section 4. The asymmetric cases were constructed on the basis of a shuffle of M copula with local upper Fréchet bounds for the driver Z, shown first. Note that the location of the corresponding line sections are one to one determined by the relative rank vectors from the original data. relative ranks r / 20 shuffle of M with local upper Fréchet bounds ·i Bernstein copula symmetric negative binomial copula, ab== 5 asymmetric negative binomial copula, ab== 5 asymmetric negative binomial copula, ab== 10 symmetric Poisson copula, ab== 6 asymmetric Poisson copula, ab== 6 asymmetric Poisson copula, ab== 10 asymmetric Poisson copula, ab== 15 As can be clearly seen, the asymmetric IPU copula follows the given data (empirical copula) much better than the symmetric IPU copulas. Also, in contrast to the Bernstein copula with no tail dependence, the asymmetric negative binomial IPU copulas always show a positive tail dependence. Since tail dependence is an asymptotic property, we can conclude that the corresponding tail dependence coefficient in the above constructions can be calculated from the parameter ab = according to relation (7). Note also that although the pictures above might suggest a positive tail dependence for the asymmetric Poisson IPU copula, this is theoretically not possible. 4. Implications for risk management The new European supervisory regulations in the financial sector (Basel III for banks, Solvency II for insurance companies) require the calculation of a sufficient capital adequacy based on the risk measure Value@Risk VaR (S), which is defined as the 1-a quantile of the distribution of the total portfolio risk SX = where X ,,  X are the individual risk positions in the portfolio. Especially in internal å i 1 d i=1 models for the calculation of the underlying aggregate risk measure, it is important to find appropriate models for the stochastic dependence between individual risk positions. It is well known that in the case of comonotonicity between risks – i.e., the underlying copula is the upper Fréchet bound – there is no diversification effect and the risk measure Value@Risk is additive (cf. McNeil et al. (2015), Proposition 7.20). Also, the worst case for the total Value@Risk is not attained under comonotonicity but rather in cases where there is a kind of local negative dependence in the upper right corner of the underlying cop- ula (cf. Puccetti and Rüschendorf (2012) or Embrechts et al. (2013)). A similar negative result holds for an assumed dependence between correlation and diversification (cf. Pfeifer (2013)), which is frequently stated in the common legislative papers. The following examples show how the asymmetric data-driven IPU copula approach can provide competing estimates for the risk measure Value@Risk on the basis of the same data observed. For the sake of simplicity, we use the data set from Cottin and Pfeifer (2014), Example 4.2, discussed above. We compare the following IPU copula approaches:  a classical Bernstein copula with grid size 20 (cf. Cottin and Pfeifer (2014))  the asymmetric negative binomial copula with parameters ab== 5, ab== 10 and ab== 15 (for short: NB5, NB 10 and NB 15)  the asymmetric Poisson copula with parameters ab== 6, ab== 10 and ab== 15 (for short: Po 6, Po 10 and Po15)  “worst case” (WC) versions of these copulas where a particular shuffle of M is used (i.e. with a local lower Fréchet bound in the upper right corner) The following graphs show the corresponding “worst case” copula driver: relative ranks r / 20 “worst case” shuffle of M ·i The following graphs show scatterplots from 5,000 simulations each for the underlying “worst case” copulas: “worst case” negative binomial copula, ab== 5 “worst case” negative binomial copula, ab== 10 “worst case” negative binomial copula, ab== 15 “worst case” Poisson copula, ab== 6 “worst case” Poisson copula, ab== 10 “worst case” Poisson copula, ab== 15 The following estimates are based on 5,000,000 Monte Carlo simulations for each particular copula ap- proach. For the marginal distributions of the two risk positions X and Y, a lognormal and a Fréchet distri- bution were estimated from the original data. The risk level a was chosen as a= 0.05. With the estimated parameters for the marginal distributions, we have VaR ( X )= 6.8190, 0,05   VaR (Y )= 2.0984 and VaR (XY )+= VaR ( ) 8.9174. From the simulations, we obtain, with 0,05 0,05 0,05 SX=+Y , Copula type Bernstein NB 5 NB 5 WC NB 10 NB 10 WC NB 15 NB 15 WC  8.9586 8.8474 9.3989 8.8834 9.5421 8.8978 9.6198 VaR (S ) 0,05  8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 VaR 0,05 ( X )+ VaR 0,05 (Y ) Copula type Po 6 Po 6 WC Po 10 Po 10 WC Po 15 Po 15 WC 8.8200 9.1402 8.8453 9.2412 8.8820 9.3532 VaR (S ) 0,05  8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 VaR ( X )+ VaR (Y ) 0,05 0,05 The following graphs show some empirical quantile functions of the simulations above: empirical quantile functions These results clearly show that the “worst case” IPU copula approaches always result in a risk concentra- tion effect while the basic negative binomial and the Poisson copula approach show a slight diversifica- tion effect which decreases with increasing parameters ab = . Note that the results for the negative bino- mial and the Poisson copula are quite close in spite of the fact that the negative binomial copula here al- ways has a positive tail dependence. It is interesting to see that the Bernstein copula also shows a risk concentration effect although there is no tail dependence and also no strict “worst case” behaviour. 5. Conclusion The IPU copula approach for asymmetric data sets is a very flexible tool to model dependencies between risks, also in higher dimensions. It covers cases of tail dependence and also of “worst case” scenarios on the basis of the same data set. It follows the shape of the data more closely than most other approaches and can easily be implemented in usual spreadsheets. Note that our motivation for a patchwork construc- tion for the copula driver resembles very much the arguments in Durante et al.(2013). The difference is, however, that the resulting IPU copula itself is not a patchwork copula. Especially in the light of the new European supervisory regulations in the financial sector such ap- proaches might be interesting to figure out unfavourable constellations which lead to a higher demand of equity or solvency capital. It should be kept in mind, however, that this is not only a problem of the as- sumed underlying copula, but also depends significantly on the type of the marginal risk distributions, as is discussed in Ibragimov and Prohorov (2017). Acknowledgement: We would like to thank the referees for some critical comments on an earlier version which lead to a clearer exposition of the content of the paper. References C. Cottin and D. Pfeifer (2014): From Bernstein polynomials to Bernstein copulas. J. Appl. Funct. Anal. 9(3-4), 277–288. P. Embrechts, G.Puccetti and L. Rüschendorf (2013): Model uncertainty and VaR aggregation. Journal of Banking & Finance 37 (8), 2750–2764. F. Durante and J. Fernández-Sánchez (2010): Multivariate shuffles and approximation of copulas. Statist. Probab. Lett. 80 (2010), no. 23-24, 1827–1834. F. Durante, J. Fernández-Sánchez and C. Sempi (2013): Multivariate patchwork copulas: a unified ap- proach with applications to partial comonotonicity. Insurance Math. Econom., 53(3), 897–905. R. Ibragimov and A. Prokhorov (2017): Heavy Tails and Copulas. Topics in Dependence Modelling in Economics and Finance. Worls Scientific, Singapore nd R.B. Nelsen (2006): An Introduction to Copulas. 2 ed., Springer, New York. A.J. McNeil, R. Frey and P. Embrechts (2015): Quantitative Risk Management. Concepts, Techniques nd and Tools. 2 revised ed., Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton. D. Pfeifer (2013): Correlation, tail dependence and diversification. In: C. Becker, R. Fried, S. Kuhnt (Eds.): Robustness and Complex Data Structures. Festschrift in Honour of Ursula Gather, 301–314, Springer, Berlin. D. Pfeifer, H.A. Tsatedem, A. Mändle and C. Girschig (2016): New copulas based on general partitions- of-unity and their applications to risk management. Depend. Model. 4, 123–140. G. Puccetti and L. Rüschendorf (2012): Computation of sharp bounds on the distribution of a function of dependent risks. J. Comput. App. Math. 236 (7), 1833–1840. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quantitative Finance arXiv (Cornell University)

New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II)

Quantitative Finance , Volume 2020 (1709) – Sep 22, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/arxiv-cornell-university/new-copulas-based-on-general-partitions-of-unity-and-their-5W7ys9WYT9
ISSN
2300-2298
eISSN
ARCH-3346
DOI
10.1515/demo-2017-0014
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II) 1) 1) 2) Dietmar Pfeifer , Andreas Mändle , and Olena Ragulina 1) Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, Germany and 2) Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine October 23, 2017 Abstract: We present a constructive and self-contained approach to data driven infinite parti- tion-of-unity copulas that were recently introduced in the literature. In particular, we consider negative binomial and Poisson copulas and present a solution to the problem of fitting such copulas to highly asymmetric data in arbitrary dimensions. Key words: copulas, partition-of-unity, tail dependence, asymmetry AMS Classification: 62H05, 62H12, 62H17, 62H20 1. Introduction Infinite partition-of-unity copulas have been introduced recently in the paper by Pfeifer et al. (2016). The main emphasis there was, however, on a particular symmetric case called diagonal dominance for which tail dependence coefficients could be explicitly calculated. The general asymmetric case was not treated in full detail. Our particular interest here is to complete the general setup with a suggestion how a data driven approach can be used to fit such copulas to highly asymmetric data in arbitrary dimensions, a ques- tion that had remained open so far. 2. A formal framework for infinite partition-of-unity copulas Assume that {j () u } for kd=Î 1, , represent discrete distributions over  with a parameter ki iÎ uÎ (0,1), i.e. j () u ³0 and j () u =1 for uÎ (0,1), ki å ki i=0 with aj:(=> ud) u 0 for iÎ . ki ki Let further { p} represent the distribution of an arbitrary discrete d-dimensional random vector Z + d iÎ +d over  where, for simplicity, we write i=(ii ,,  ), and 1 d +d Pp (Zi== ) ,. iÎ Suppose further that for the marginal distributions, there holds PZ( == i) a,, iÎ k=1, ,d. kki Then p d cu ()uu :== j ( ),u ,,uÎ 0,1 (1) ()( ) å  ki,1 k d + d iÎ k=1  ki , k=1 defines the density of a d-variate copula, which is called infinite partition-of-unity copula (IPU-copula for short). Alternatively, we can rewrite (1) as cp ()uu== f (u ), ()u ,,uÎ(0,1) (2) i ki,1 k d + d k=1 iÎ j () ki where the f () =Î ,ik ,=1,,d denote the Lebesgue densities induced by the {j () u } . ki ki iÎ ki A stochastic representation of the probability distribution induced by (1) or (2) is given by the random vector UZ== UZU ,, Z : ,,U (with Z as above) with stochastically independent ran- () ( ) () 1 dd 1,Z ,Z 1 d dom variables Uk|1=Î , ,d,i (also independent of Z) where the distribution of U is induced {} ki ki j () ki by the density f () =Î ,ik ,=1,,d. Z is called the driver of the IPU copula with density ki ki given in (1). The following two classes of IPU copulas have been investigated in detail in Pfeifer et al. (2016), among others: Example 1 (negative binomial copula): Let, for fixed integers a > 0, æö ai+-1 NB k i a + ç k j ()uu =÷ (1-u) for ki , Î and uÎ (0,1). (3) ki ç ÷ èø NB NB k Here we have aj== () udu which corresponds to a discrete analogy of a ki ki () ai++(ai+1) kk NB Pareto distribution. The densities f are those of a beta distribution with parameters (ia++ 1, 1). The ki k corresponding copula density is thus given by dd æö ai++1 ad NB kk i k ç k ca ()uu =+ ( 1) p u() 1-u , Î(0,1) (4) kk i k ç ÷ + d i èø kk== 11 iÎ k with p == PZ i = ,, iÎ k=1, ,d. () ik  k k () ai++(ai+1) kk kk Example 2 (Poisson copula): Let, for Lu ():=-ln(1-u)>0, uÎ(0,1) and fixed parameters a > 0, ii aL() u P k j ()uu =- (1 ) (5) ki i ! æöæ ö aa PP kk÷÷ çç ÷÷ Here we have aj== () udu 1- , representing geometric distributions over  . çç ki ki ò ÷÷ çç çç÷÷ aa++ 11 èøè ø kk Lu () i+1 a The densities f are those of a transformed gamma distribution with f ()ua=+ ( 1) (1-u) ki ki k i ! for , kiÎ and uÎ (0,1). The corresponding copula density is thus given by dd a +1 () id P ki k ca ()uu =+ ( 1) p L ()u (1-u) , Î(0,1) (6) kk i k + d i ! kk== 11 iÎ k æöæ ö aa a ÷÷ + ççkk k with p == PZ i = ÷÷1, - = iÎ,k=1,,d. ()çç ik  k k ÷÷ i +1 çç k çç÷÷ aa++ 11 (a+1) èøè ø kk k Note that a random variable X with density f can be represented as X =- 1 exp(-Y ), where Y ki ki ki ki ki follows a gamma distribution with shape parameter i+1 and scale parameter a +1. In Pfeifer et al. (2016), essentially the symmetrical case, i.e. the case of identical components of the driver Z was considered (so called diagonal dominance). This means that the copula induced by the d- variate distribution of Z is given by the upper Fréchet bound Cu ()uu=Î min ,u , (0,1) . In the () 1, d two-dimensional case, the above formulas simplify to a great extent. In particular, it was proved that the negative binomial copula for arbitrary aa==a> 0 has a positive tail dependence coefficient given by æö 2a NB cu (,v)dudv òò ç ÷ èø 1 tt l (aa )== lim 1-  1- for large . (7) t1 14 - t pa The Poisson copula, in contrast, has no tail dependence for all choices aa==a> 0 although the den- sity given by (6) is unbounded and has a pole in the point (uv , )= (1,1). density of a bivariate negative binomial copula, a= 5 density of a bivariate Poisson copula, a= 5 So far the question remained open how such copulas could be fitted to highly asymmetric data in arbitrary dimensions. In the sequel, we shall give a constructive answer to this problem. 3. Constructing infinite partition-of-unity copulas from given data The general idea here is to relate the p , which essentially determine the structure of the IPU cop- {} + d iÎ ula, to the empirical copula given by the data observed in an appropriate way. Let, for this purpose, de- note C a copula that is suitably estimated from the empirical copula, like a Bernstein copula, a rook cop- ula (cf. Cottin and Pfeifer (2014)), appropriate shuffles of M (cf. Nelsen (2006), section 3.2.3) or other patchwork copulas that can be easily simulated by Monte Carlo methods (cf. Durante and Fernández- Sánchez (2010) or Durante et al. (2013)). Let further denote F the cumulative distribution function in- ˆˆ ˆ duced by the discrete distribution a , i.e. Fi ()=Î a , i  . If U=UU ,,  denotes a stochas- () k· kkj 1 d j=0 -1 ˆ ˆ tic representation of C, set Z :=FU for kd = 1, , . Then Z=() Z ,,  Z is an appropriate driver () kk k 1 d for a data-driven IPU copula. For the examples given above, the resulting formulas are quite simple. êú aU -1 kk ˆ êú ê ú Example 1: ZF== U , where zx=Î max{}  |x£z (round down). () kk k ë û êú 1-U ëû êú ˆ -- ln(1 U ) -1 ˆ êú Example 2: ZF== U . () kk k êú ln(aa +- 1) ln kk ëû This follows immediately from standard arguments in Monte Carlo theory: in Example 1, we have êú ˆ æö aU ii+1 ii+1 kk ç ˆ ˆ êú Z== i iff £< U , with probabilities PZ()== i P £U < ÷ k k kk êú ç ç ÷ 1-U ai++ ai+1 ai++ ai+1 èø k kk kk ëû = for iÎ , as desired. () ai++(ai+1) kk ii+1 ê ˆ ú æö æö -- ln(1 U ) aa -1 ÷÷ k ççkk ˆ ˆ ê ú In Example 2, we have Z== FU =i iff 11 -£÷÷ U<- , çç () kkk k ÷÷ ê ú çç çç÷÷ ln(aa +- 1) ln aa++ 11 èø èø kk kk ë û ii+1 i æö æö æö æöæ ö ç aa a a a ÷÷ ÷ ÷ ççkk ÷ k çkç k with probabilities PZ()== i P1- ÷÷ £U <1- = = ÷1- ÷ çç ÷ ç ç kk ç ÷÷ i+1 ÷ ÷ çç ç ç ççç÷÷ ç ÷ç ÷ aa++ 11 ÷(a+1) a+1 a+1 èø èø ÷ èøè ø kk k k k èø for , iÎ as desired. The method proposed here allows for a great flexibility concerning the construction of data-driven IPU copulas, including cases with positive tail dependence. We discuss this here along the example given in Cottin and Pfeifer (2014), Example 4.2, which was also the basis for the discussion in Pfeifer et al. (2016), Section 4. The following table shows the original data x y and the corresponding rank vectors rr,. () () ii 12ii x y r r i i 1i 2i 1 0.468 0.966 4 9 2 9.951 2.679 20 20 3 0.866 0.897 8 4 4 6.731 2.249 19 19 5 1.421 0.956 13 8 6 2.040 1.141 17 15 7 2.967 1.707 18 18 8 1.200 1.008 11 10 9 0.426 1.065 3 12 graph of original data 10 1.946 1.162 15 16 11 0.676 0.918 5 6 12 1.184 1.336 10 17 13 0.960 0.933 9 7 14 1.972 1.077 16 13 15 1.549 1.041 14 11 16 0.819 0.899 6 5 17 0.063 0.710 1 1 18 1.280 1.118 12 14 19 0.824 0.894 7 3 20 0.227 0.837 2 2 graph of rank vectors The following graphs show 5,000 Monte Carlo simulations each from different constructions of data- driven IPU copulas (small dots), with a superposition of the empirical copula (scaled rank vectors) as lar- ge white points. The symmetric cases (negative binomial and Poisson copulas) were constructed accord- ing to the suggestions in Pfeifer et al. (2016), Section 4. The asymmetric cases were constructed on the basis of a shuffle of M copula with local upper Fréchet bounds for the driver Z, shown first. Note that the location of the corresponding line sections are one to one determined by the relative rank vectors from the original data. relative ranks r / 20 shuffle of M with local upper Fréchet bounds ·i Bernstein copula symmetric negative binomial copula, ab== 5 asymmetric negative binomial copula, ab== 5 asymmetric negative binomial copula, ab== 10 symmetric Poisson copula, ab== 6 asymmetric Poisson copula, ab== 6 asymmetric Poisson copula, ab== 10 asymmetric Poisson copula, ab== 15 As can be clearly seen, the asymmetric IPU copula follows the given data (empirical copula) much better than the symmetric IPU copulas. Also, in contrast to the Bernstein copula with no tail dependence, the asymmetric negative binomial IPU copulas always show a positive tail dependence. Since tail dependence is an asymptotic property, we can conclude that the corresponding tail dependence coefficient in the above constructions can be calculated from the parameter ab = according to relation (7). Note also that although the pictures above might suggest a positive tail dependence for the asymmetric Poisson IPU copula, this is theoretically not possible. 4. Implications for risk management The new European supervisory regulations in the financial sector (Basel III for banks, Solvency II for insurance companies) require the calculation of a sufficient capital adequacy based on the risk measure Value@Risk VaR (S), which is defined as the 1-a quantile of the distribution of the total portfolio risk SX = where X ,,  X are the individual risk positions in the portfolio. Especially in internal å i 1 d i=1 models for the calculation of the underlying aggregate risk measure, it is important to find appropriate models for the stochastic dependence between individual risk positions. It is well known that in the case of comonotonicity between risks – i.e., the underlying copula is the upper Fréchet bound – there is no diversification effect and the risk measure Value@Risk is additive (cf. McNeil et al. (2015), Proposition 7.20). Also, the worst case for the total Value@Risk is not attained under comonotonicity but rather in cases where there is a kind of local negative dependence in the upper right corner of the underlying cop- ula (cf. Puccetti and Rüschendorf (2012) or Embrechts et al. (2013)). A similar negative result holds for an assumed dependence between correlation and diversification (cf. Pfeifer (2013)), which is frequently stated in the common legislative papers. The following examples show how the asymmetric data-driven IPU copula approach can provide competing estimates for the risk measure Value@Risk on the basis of the same data observed. For the sake of simplicity, we use the data set from Cottin and Pfeifer (2014), Example 4.2, discussed above. We compare the following IPU copula approaches:  a classical Bernstein copula with grid size 20 (cf. Cottin and Pfeifer (2014))  the asymmetric negative binomial copula with parameters ab== 5, ab== 10 and ab== 15 (for short: NB5, NB 10 and NB 15)  the asymmetric Poisson copula with parameters ab== 6, ab== 10 and ab== 15 (for short: Po 6, Po 10 and Po15)  “worst case” (WC) versions of these copulas where a particular shuffle of M is used (i.e. with a local lower Fréchet bound in the upper right corner) The following graphs show the corresponding “worst case” copula driver: relative ranks r / 20 “worst case” shuffle of M ·i The following graphs show scatterplots from 5,000 simulations each for the underlying “worst case” copulas: “worst case” negative binomial copula, ab== 5 “worst case” negative binomial copula, ab== 10 “worst case” negative binomial copula, ab== 15 “worst case” Poisson copula, ab== 6 “worst case” Poisson copula, ab== 10 “worst case” Poisson copula, ab== 15 The following estimates are based on 5,000,000 Monte Carlo simulations for each particular copula ap- proach. For the marginal distributions of the two risk positions X and Y, a lognormal and a Fréchet distri- bution were estimated from the original data. The risk level a was chosen as a= 0.05. With the estimated parameters for the marginal distributions, we have VaR ( X )= 6.8190, 0,05   VaR (Y )= 2.0984 and VaR (XY )+= VaR ( ) 8.9174. From the simulations, we obtain, with 0,05 0,05 0,05 SX=+Y , Copula type Bernstein NB 5 NB 5 WC NB 10 NB 10 WC NB 15 NB 15 WC  8.9586 8.8474 9.3989 8.8834 9.5421 8.8978 9.6198 VaR (S ) 0,05  8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 VaR 0,05 ( X )+ VaR 0,05 (Y ) Copula type Po 6 Po 6 WC Po 10 Po 10 WC Po 15 Po 15 WC 8.8200 9.1402 8.8453 9.2412 8.8820 9.3532 VaR (S ) 0,05  8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 8.9174 VaR ( X )+ VaR (Y ) 0,05 0,05 The following graphs show some empirical quantile functions of the simulations above: empirical quantile functions These results clearly show that the “worst case” IPU copula approaches always result in a risk concentra- tion effect while the basic negative binomial and the Poisson copula approach show a slight diversifica- tion effect which decreases with increasing parameters ab = . Note that the results for the negative bino- mial and the Poisson copula are quite close in spite of the fact that the negative binomial copula here al- ways has a positive tail dependence. It is interesting to see that the Bernstein copula also shows a risk concentration effect although there is no tail dependence and also no strict “worst case” behaviour. 5. Conclusion The IPU copula approach for asymmetric data sets is a very flexible tool to model dependencies between risks, also in higher dimensions. It covers cases of tail dependence and also of “worst case” scenarios on the basis of the same data set. It follows the shape of the data more closely than most other approaches and can easily be implemented in usual spreadsheets. Note that our motivation for a patchwork construc- tion for the copula driver resembles very much the arguments in Durante et al.(2013). The difference is, however, that the resulting IPU copula itself is not a patchwork copula. Especially in the light of the new European supervisory regulations in the financial sector such ap- proaches might be interesting to figure out unfavourable constellations which lead to a higher demand of equity or solvency capital. It should be kept in mind, however, that this is not only a problem of the as- sumed underlying copula, but also depends significantly on the type of the marginal risk distributions, as is discussed in Ibragimov and Prohorov (2017). Acknowledgement: We would like to thank the referees for some critical comments on an earlier version which lead to a clearer exposition of the content of the paper. References C. Cottin and D. Pfeifer (2014): From Bernstein polynomials to Bernstein copulas. J. Appl. Funct. Anal. 9(3-4), 277–288. P. Embrechts, G.Puccetti and L. Rüschendorf (2013): Model uncertainty and VaR aggregation. Journal of Banking & Finance 37 (8), 2750–2764. F. Durante and J. Fernández-Sánchez (2010): Multivariate shuffles and approximation of copulas. Statist. Probab. Lett. 80 (2010), no. 23-24, 1827–1834. F. Durante, J. Fernández-Sánchez and C. Sempi (2013): Multivariate patchwork copulas: a unified ap- proach with applications to partial comonotonicity. Insurance Math. Econom., 53(3), 897–905. R. Ibragimov and A. Prokhorov (2017): Heavy Tails and Copulas. Topics in Dependence Modelling in Economics and Finance. Worls Scientific, Singapore nd R.B. Nelsen (2006): An Introduction to Copulas. 2 ed., Springer, New York. A.J. McNeil, R. Frey and P. Embrechts (2015): Quantitative Risk Management. Concepts, Techniques nd and Tools. 2 revised ed., Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton. D. Pfeifer (2013): Correlation, tail dependence and diversification. In: C. Becker, R. Fried, S. Kuhnt (Eds.): Robustness and Complex Data Structures. Festschrift in Honour of Ursula Gather, 301–314, Springer, Berlin. D. Pfeifer, H.A. Tsatedem, A. Mändle and C. Girschig (2016): New copulas based on general partitions- of-unity and their applications to risk management. Depend. Model. 4, 123–140. G. Puccetti and L. Rüschendorf (2012): Computation of sharp bounds on the distribution of a function of dependent risks. J. Comput. App. Math. 236 (7), 1833–1840.

Journal

Quantitative FinancearXiv (Cornell University)

Published: Sep 22, 2017

References