Paper detail

Wrong-Way Risk Models: A Comparison of Analytical Exposures

In this paper, we compare static and dynamic (reduced form) approaches for modeling wrong-way risk in the context of CVA. Although all these approaches potentially suffer from arbitrage problems, they are popular (respectively) in industry and academia, mainly due to analytical tractability reasons. We complete the stochastic intensity models with another dynamic approach, consisting in the straight modeling of the survival (Azéma supermartingale) process using the $Φ$-martingale. Just like the other approaches, this method allows for automatic calibration to a given default probability curve. We derive analytically the positive exposures $V^+_t$ "conditional upon default" associated to prototypical market price processes of FRA and IRS in all cases. We further discuss the link between the "default" condition and change-of-measure techniques. The expectation of $V^+_t$ conditional upon $τ=t$ is equal to the unconditional expectation of $V^+_tζ_t$. The process $ζ$ is explicitly derived in the dynamic approaches: it is proven to be positive and to have unit expectation. Unfortunately however, it fails to be a martingale, so that Girsanov machinery cannot be used. Nevertheless, the expectation of $V^+_tζ_t$ can be computed explicitly, leading to analytical expected positive exposure profiles in the considered examples.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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 map preview

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.