BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Chris Kenyon

Chris Kenyon appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
q-fin.PRq-fin.RMq-fin.CPq-fin.GNq-fin.MFq-fin.PMecon.GNq-fin.EC

Catalog footprint

What is connected

14works
8topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

14 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Transparency principle for carbon emissions drives sustainable finance

Alignment of financial market incentives and carbon emissions disincentives is key to limiting global warming. Regulators and standards bodies have made a start by requiring some carbon-related disclosures and proposing others. Here we go further and propose a Carbon Equivalence Principle: all financial products shall contain a description of the equivalent carbon flows from greenhouse gases that the products enable, as well as their existing description in terms of cash flows. This description of the carbon flows enabled by the project shall be compatible with existing bank systems that track cashflows so that carbon flows have equal standing to cash flows. We demonstrate that this transparency alone can align incentives by applying it to project finance examples for power generation and by following through the financial analysis. The financial requirements to offset costs of carbon flows enabled in the future radically change project costs, and risk that assets become stranded, thus further increasing costs. This observation holds whichever partner in the project bears the enabled-carbon costs. Mitigating these risks requires project re-structuring to include negative emissions technologies. We also consider that sequestered carbon needs to remain sequestered permanently, e.g., for at least one hundred years. We introduce mixed financial-physical solutions to minimise this permanence cost, and price to them. This complements previous insurance-based proposals with lesser scope. For financial viability we introduce project designs that are financially net-zero, and as a consequence are carbon negative. Thus we see that adoption of the Carbon Equivalence Principle for financial products aligns incentives, requires product redesign, and is simply good financial management driving sustainability.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

XVA at the Exercise Boundary

XVA is a material component of a trade valuation and hence it must impact the decision to exercise options within a given netting set. This is true for both unsecured trades and secured / cleared trades where KVA and MVA play a material role even if CVA and FVA do not. However, this effect has frequently been ignored in XVA models and indeed in exercise decisions made by option owners. This paper describes how XVA impacts the exercise decision and how this can be readily evaluated using regression techniques (Longstaff and Schwartz 2001). The paper then assesses the materiality of the impact of XVA at the exercise boundary on swaption examples.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Dirac Processes and Default Risk

We introduce Dirac processes, using Dirac delta functions, for short-rate-type pricing of financial derivatives. Dirac processes add spikes to the existing building blocks of diffusions and jumps. Dirac processes are Generalized Processes, which have not been used directly before because the dollar value of non-Real numbers is meaningless. However, short-rate pricing is based on integrals so Dirac processes are natural. This integration directly implies that jumps are redundant whilst Dirac processes expand expressivity of short-rate approaches. Practically, we demonstrate that Dirac processes enable high implied volatility for CDS swaptions that has been otherwise problematic in hazard rate setups.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

MVA: Initial Margin Valuation Adjustment by Replication and Regression

Initial margin requirements are becoming an increasingly common feature of derivative markets. However, while the valuation of derivatives under collateralisation (Piterbarg 2010, Piterbarg2012), under counterparty risk with unsecured funding costs (FVA) (Burgard2011, Burgard2011, Burgard2013) and in the presence of regulatory capital (KVA) (Green2014) are established through valuation adjustments, hitherto initial margin has not been considered. This paper further extends the semi-replication framework of (Burgard2013a), itself later extended by (Green2014), to cover the cost of initial margin, leading to Margin Valuation Adjustment (MVA). Initial margin requirements are typically generated through the use of VAR or CVAR models. Given the form of MVA as an integral over the expected initial margin profile this would lead to excessive computational costs if a brute force calculation were to be used. Hence we also propose a computationally efficient approach to the calculation of MVA through the use of regression techniques, Longstaff-Schwartz Augmented Compression (LSAC).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Self-Financing Trading and the Ito-Doeblin Lemma

The objective of the note is to remind readers on how self-financing works in Quantitative Finance. The authors have observed continuing uncertainty on this issue which may be because it lies exactly at the intersection of stochastic calculus and finance. The concept of a self-financing trading strategy was originally, and carefully, introduced in (Harrison and Kreps 1979) and expanded very generally in (Harrison and Pliska 1981).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Warehousing Credit (CVA) Risk, Capital (KVA) and Tax (TVA) Consequences

Credit risk may be warehoused by choice, or because of limited hedging possibilities. Credit risk warehousing increases capital requirements and leaves open risk. Open risk must be priced in the physical measure, rather than the risk neutral measure, and implies profits and losses. Furthermore the rate of return on capital that shareholders require must be paid from profits. Profits are taxable and losses provide tax credits. Here we extend the semi-replication approach of Burgard and Kjaer (2013) and the capital formalism (KVA) of Green, Kenyon, and Dennis (2014) to cover credit risk warehousing and tax, formalized as double-semi-replication and TVA (Tax Valuation Adjustment) to enable quantification.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Which measure for PFE? The Risk Appetite Measure, A

Potential Future Exposure (PFE) is a standard risk metric for managing business unit counterparty credit risk but there is debate on how it should be calculated. The debate has been whether to use one of many historical ("physical") measures (one per calibration setup), or one of many risk-neutral measures (one per numeraire). However, we argue that limits should be based on the bank's own risk appetite provided that this is consistent with regulatory backtesting and that whichever measure is used it should behave (in a sense made precise) like a historical measure. Backtesting is only required by regulators for banks with IMM approval but we expect that similar methods are part of limit maintenance generally. We provide three methods for computing the bank price of risk from readily available business unit data, i.e. business unit budgets (rate of return) and limits (e.g. exposure percentiles). Hence we define and propose a Risk Appetite Measure, A, for PFE and suggest that this is uniquely consistent with the bank's Risk Appetite Framework as required by sound governance.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Efficient XVA Management: Pricing, Hedging, and Attribution using Trade-Level Regression and Global Conditioning

Banks must manage their trading books, not just value them. Pricing includes valuation adjustments collectively known as XVA (at least credit, funding, capital and tax), so management must also include XVA. In trading book management we focus on pricing, hedging, and allocation of prices or hedging costs to desks on an individual trade basis. We show how to combine three technical elements to radically simplify XVA management, both in terms of the calculations, and the implementation of the calculations. The three technical elements are: trade-level regression; analytic computation of sensitivities; and global conditioning. All three are required to obtain the radical efficiency gains and implementation simplification. Moreover, many of the calculations are inherently parallel and suitable for GPU implementation. The resulting methodology for XVA management is sufficiently general that we can cover pricing, first- and second-order sensitivities, and exact trade-level allocation of pricing and sensitivities within the same framework. Managing incremental changes to portfolios exactly is also radically simplified.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

KVA: Capital Valuation Adjustment

Credit (CVA), Debit (DVA) and Funding Valuation Adjustments (FVA) are now familiar valuation adjustments made to the value of a portfolio of derivatives to account for credit risks and funding costs. However, recent changes in the regulatory regime and the increases in regulatory capital requirements has led many banks to include the cost of capital in derivative pricing. This paper formalises the addition of cost of capital by extending the Burgard-Kjaer (2013) semi-replication approach to CVA and FVA to include an addition capital term, Capital Valuation Adjustment (KVA, i.e. Kapital Valuation Adjustment to distinguish from CVA.) The utilization of the capital for funding purposes is also considered. The use of the semi-replication approach means that the flexibility around the treatment of self-default is carried over into this analysis. The paper further considers the practical calculation of KVA with reference to the Basel II (BCBS-128) and Basel III (BCBS-189) capital regimes and their implementation via CRD IV. The paper also assesses how KVA may be hedged, given that any hedging transactions themselves lead to regulatory capital requirements and hence capital costs. Finally a number of numerical examples are presented to gauge the cost impact of KVA on vanilla derivative products.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Regulatory-Compliant Derivatives Pricing is Not Risk-Neutral

Regulations impose idiosyncratic capital and funding costs for holding derivatives. Capital requirements are costly because derivatives desks are risky businesses; funding is costly in part because regulations increase the minimum funding tenor. Idiosyncratic costs mean no single measure makes derivatives martingales for all market participants. Hence Regulatory-compliant pricing is not risk-neutral. This has implications for exit prices and mark-to-market.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

VAR and ES/CVAR Dependence on data cleaning and Data Models: Analysis and Resolution

Historical (Stressed-) Value-at-Risk ((S)VAR), and Expected Shortfall (ES), are widely used risk measures in regulatory capital and Initial Margin, i.e. funding, computations. However, whilst the definitions of VAR and ES are unambiguous, they depend on input distributions that are data-cleaning- and Data-Model-dependent. We quantify the scale of these effects from USD CDS (2004--2014), and from USD interest rates (1989--2014, single-curve setup before 2004, multi-curve setup after 2004), and make two standardisation proposals: for data; and for Data-Models. VAR and ES are required for lifetime portfolio calculations, i.e. collateral calls, which cover a wide range of market states. Hence we need standard, i.e. clean, complete, and common (i.e. identical for all banks), market data also covering this wide range of market states. This data is historically incomplete and not clean hence data standardization is required. Stressed VAR and ES require moving market movements during a past (usually not recent) window to current, and future, market states. All choices (e.g. absolute difference, relative, relative scaled by some function of market states) implicitly define a Data Model for transformation of extreme market moves (recall that 99th percentiles are typical, and the behaviour of the rest is irrelevant). Hence we propose standard Data Models. These are necessary because different banks have different stress windows. Where there is no data, or a requirement for simplicity, we propose standard lookup tables (one per window, etc.). Without this standardization of data and Data Models we demonstrate that VAR and ES are complex derivatives of subjective choices.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Collateral-Enhanced Default Risk

Changes in collateralization have been implicated in significant default (or near-default) events during the financial crisis, most notably with AIG. We have developed a framework for quantifying this effect based on moving between Merton-type and Black-Cox-type structural default models. Our framework leads to a single equation that emcompasses the range of possibilities, including collateralization remargining frequency (i.e. discrete observations). We show that increases in collateralization, by exposing entities to daily mark-to-market volatility, enhance default probability. This quantifies the well-known problem with collateral triggers. Furthermore our model can be used to quantify the degree to which central counterparties, whilst removing credit risk transmission, systematically increase default risk.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Will Central Counterparties become the New Rating Agencies?

Central Counterparties (CCPs) are widely promoted as a requirement for safe banking with little dissent except on technical grounds (such as proliferation of CCPs). Whilst CCPs can have major operational positives, we argue that CCPs have many of the business characteristics of Rating Agencies, and face similar business pressures. Thus we see a risk that prices from CCPs may develop the characteristics attributed to ratings from Rating Agency pre-crisis. Business over-reliance on ratings of questionable accuracy is seen as a cause of the financial crisis. We see the potential for same situation to be repeated with prices from CCPs. Thus the regulatory emphasis on CCPs, rather than on collateralization, may create the preconditions for an avoidable repeat of the financial crisis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2010arXiv

Completing CVA and Liquidity: Firm-Level Positions and Collateralized Trades

Bilateral CVA as currently implement has the counterintuitive effect of profiting from one's own widening CDS spreads, i.e. increased risk of default, in practice. The unified picture of CVA and liquidity introduced by Morini & Prampolini 2010 has contributed to understanding this. However, there are two significant omissions for practical implementation that come from the same source, i.e. positions not booked in usual position-keeping systems. The first omission is firm-level positions that change value upon firm default. An example is Goodwill which is a line item on balance sheets and typically written down to zero on default. Another example would be firm Equity. The second omission relates to collateralized positions. When these positions are out of the money in future, which has a positive probability, they will require funding that cannot be secured using the position itself. These contingent future funding positions are usually not booked in any position-keeping system. We show here how to include these two types of positions and thus help to complete the unified picture of CVA and liquidity. For a particular large complex financial institution that profited $2.5B from spread widening we show that including Goodwill would have resulted in a $4B loss under conservative assumptions. Whilst we cannot make a similar assessment for its collateralized derivative portfolio we calculate both the funding costs and the CVA from own default for a range of swaps and find that CVA was a positive contribution in the examples.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access