Journal of Risk Model Validation
ISSN:
1753-9579 (print)
1753-9587 (online)
Editor-in-chief: Steve Satchell
Dissecting initial margin forecasts: models, limitations and backtesting
Need to know
- Most of industry research in initial margin (IM) forecasting assumes that IM is value-at-risk (VaR) and the challenge of IM forecasting is reduced to forward VaR forecasting.
- This paper demonstrates that “IM is VaR” is an approximation which impacts forecasting accuracy and backtesting.
- Within the “IM is VaR” simplification, IM prediction is the forecast of another forecast, not as often assumed, forward VaR forecasting. This also impacts accuracy and backtesting.
- A generic backtesting and verification framework is proposed accommodating both forecasting limitations and industry existing models.
Abstract
Initial margin (IM) has a significant impact on counterparty exposure, pricing, capital and limits. This makes the modeling of future IM a critical element of counterparty risk management and pricing. All the current approaches, which we review in this paper, consider IM as value-at-risk (VaR) and therefore develop methods for forecasting forward VaR, and some approaches have then further proposed backtesting of VaR forecasts for model verification. We show that such approaches are limited and have also biased the industry regarding the use of backtesting and model verification. This paper attempts to correct this bias. First, we highlight that IM is not VaR but merely its approximation. Then we show that even with an “IM is VaR” assumption, the forecast of IM is a forecast of a forecast, which is principally different from “just” forward VaR forecasting. We demonstrate the fundamental limitations that follow from this assumption, and after reviewing the literature on IM forecasting, we propose a generic backtesting and verification framework that accommodates both forecasting limitations and existing models. For model verification we consider two approaches: direct backtesting/monitoring and an “elicitability”-related approach. Our analysis also includes the special case of a bank’s model of IM/VaR being a near perfect replica of an exchange’s IM.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net