Paper detail

Regression Based Expected Shortfall Backtesting

This paper introduces novel backtests for the risk measure Expected Shortfall (ES) following the testing idea of Mincer and Zarnowitz (1969). Estimating a regression framework for the ES stand-alone is infeasible, and thus, our tests are based on a joint regression for the Value at Risk and the ES, which allows for different test specifications. These ES backtests are the first which solely backtest the ES in the sense that they only require ES forecasts as input parameters. As the tests are potentially subject to model misspecification, we provide asymptotic theory under misspecification for the underlying joint regression. We find that employing a misspecification robust covariance estimator substantially improves the tests' performance. We compare our backtests to existing approaches and find that our tests outperform the competitors throughout all considered simulations. In an empirical illustration, we apply our backtests to ES forecasts for 200 stocks of the S&P 500 index.

preprint2019arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.