Journal of Financial Market Infrastructures

Risk.net

Correlation breakdowns, spread positions and central counterparty margin models

David Li, Fernando Cerezetti and Roy M. Cheruvelil

  • The default of a participant at Nasdaq in 2018 and the COVID-19 events in 2020 resurfaced debates among CCP risk managers concerning appropriately measuring correlation breakdowns.
  • As markets develop and alter the way demand and supply are established, so does the way correlations behave during times of adverse conditions.
  • The sizable price dislocations registered during the Nasdaq and COVID-19 events suggested that traditional risk models may not be fully equipped to capture the correlation breakdowns.
  • Using an enhanced multivariate model, the paper proposes that correlation breakdowns may be more frequent, and behave differently, than traditionally postulated.

The default of a member of the Nasdaq Clearing commodities market in 2018 and the Covid-19 events in 2020 brought the importance of appropriately measuring breakdowns in market correlation to the attention of risk managers at central counterparties. The sizable price dislocations registered on these occasions suggested that traditional risk models may not be fully equipped to capture such breakdowns. Because correlations are directly impacted by the statistical properties of each variable, any model that lacks the capacity to deal with nonstationarity may inappropriately represent correlations or their alterations. Using an approach that combines a generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity model with dynamic conditional correlation (GARCH-DCC) to accommodate such properties, we aim to study correlation behavior during adverse market conditions and the potential impact on central counterparty margins. We propose a case study on energy commodities, with a specific focus on spread positions for the electricity market. The analysis suggests that correlation breakdowns are more frequent than traditionally expected. When different types of shocks (ie, those of September 2018 and March–May 2020) are considered, it becomes evident that while the magnitudes of the breakdowns may differ, their cycles present a number of similarities. We also recognize the potentially increased margin procyclicality that may be entailed by model corrections to deal with correlation breakdowns, highlighting the challenges of balancing margin responsiveness and stability during adverse market conditions.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here