Eficiencia de las técnicas de medición del riesgo de mercado ante situaciones de crisis

  1. González Sánchez, Mariano
  2. Nave Pineda, Juan M.
Aldizkaria:
Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

ISSN: 0210-2412

Argitalpen urtea: 2010

Zenbakia: 145

Orrialdeak: 41-64

Mota: Artikulua

DOI: 10.1080/02102412.2010.10779678 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Beste argitalpen batzuk: Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

Garapen Iraunkorreko Helburuak

Erreferentzia bibliografikoak

  • ANGELIDIS, T.; BENOS, A., y DEGIANNAKIS, S. 2005. The use of GARH models in VaR estimation. Statistical Methodology 2:49-57.
  • BALI, T., y THEODOSSIOU, P. 2007. A conditional-sgt-var approach with alternative garch models. Annals of Operations Research 151:241-267.
  • BAO, Y.; LEE, T.-H., y SALTOGLU, B. 2006. Evaluating predictive performance of value-at-risk models in emerging markets: a reality check. Journal of Forecasting 25:101-128.
  • BAO, Y.; LEE, T.-H; SALTOGLU, B., y ULLAH, A. 2004. Bias of value-at-risk model. Finance Research Letters 1:241-249.
  • BARONE-ADESI, G.; GIANNOPOULOS, K., y VOSPER, L. 2000. Filtering Historical Simulation Backtest Analysis. Working Paper, University of Westminster.
  • BERKOWITZ, J., y O'BRIEN, J. 2002. How Accurate are Value-at-Risk Models at Commercial Banks, Journal of Finance 57(3):1093-1111.
  • BERKOWITZ, J.; O'BRIEN, J.; CHRISTOFFERSEN, P., y PELLETIER, D. 2006. Evaluating value-at-risk models with desk-level data. Working Paper Series 010 Department of Economies, North Carolina State University.
  • BILLIO, M., y SARTORE, D. 2003. Stochastic Volatility Models: A Survey with Applications to Option Pricing and Value at Risk. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley.
  • BOLLERSLEV, T., y WOOLDRIDGE, J. M. 1992. Quasi maximum likelihood estimation and inference in dynamic models with time varying covariances. Econometric Review 11:143-172.
  • BOUDOUKH, J.; RICHARDSON, M., y WHITELAW, R. 1998. The Best of Both Worlds. Risk 11(5):64-67.
  • BRUMMELHUIS, R., y KAUFMANN, R. 2007. Time Scaling of Value-at-Risk in GARCH (1, 1) and AR (1) - GARCH (1, 1) Processes. The Journal of Risk 9(4):39-94.
  • CHAN, N. H.; DENG, S. J.; PENG, L., y XIA, Z. 2007. Interval estimation for the conditional value at risk based on garch models with heavy tailed innovations. Journal of Econometrics 137:556-576.
  • CONT, R. 2001. Empirical properties of assets returns: stylized facts and statistical issues. Quantitative Finance, 1:223-236.
  • DIEBOLD, F. X.; HICKMAN, A.; INQUE, A., y SCHUERMANN, T. 1998. Scale models. Risk 11:104-107.
  • DROST, F. C., y NIJMAN, T. T. 1993. Temporal aggregation of GARCH processes. Econometrica, 61, 909-927.
  • EBERLEIN, E.; KALLSEN, J., y KRISTEN, J. 2003. Risk management based on stochastic volatility. Journal of Risk 5:19-44.
  • EMBRECHTS, P.; KLÜPPELBERG, C., y MIKOSCH, T. 1997. Modelling extremal events for insurance and fi nance. New York: Springer.
  • HERNÁNDEZ SÁNCHEZ, M. 2003. El efecto nivel de riesgo en las metodologías VaR. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad XXXII(119):1013-1051.
  • HILL, B. M. 1975. A simple general approach to inference about the tail of a distribution. Annals of Statistics 3:1163-1174.
  • HOSKING, J. R. M.; WALLIS, H., y WOOD, E. 1985. Estimation of Generalized Extreme Value Distribution by Method of Probability Weighted Moments. Technometrics 27:251-261.
  • JOHSON, N.; KOTZ, S., y BALAKRISHNAN, N. 1994. Continuous Univariate Distritutions. 2nd Edition, Vol. 1, New York: John Wiley.
  • JORION, P. 2000. Value at Risk: The New Benchmark for Controlling Market Risk. 2nd Edition, New York: McGraw Hill.
  • JU, X., y PEARSON, N. D. 1999. Using value-at-risk to control risk taking: How wrong can you be? Journal of Risk 1:5-36.
  • KRAUSE, A. 2003. Exploring the limitations of value at risk: How good is it in practice? Journal of Risk Finance 4(2):19-28.
  • KUESTER, K.; MITTNIK, S., y PAOLELLA, M. 2006. Value-at-risk prediction: A comparison of alternative strategies. Journal of Financial Econometrics 4 (1), 53-89.
  • LIMA, R., y NERI, B. 2007. Comparing value-at-risk methodologies. Brazilian Review of Econometrics 27, 1-25.
  • MCNEIL, A., y FREY, R. 2000. Estimation of tail-related risk measures for heterocedastic fi nancial time series: an extreme value approach. Journal of Empirical Finance 7:271-300.
  • MITTNIK, S., y PAOLELLA, M. 2000. Conditional density and value-at-risk prediction of Asian currency exchange rates. Journal of Forecasting 19:313-333.
  • PEROTE, J. 2003. Value at Risk of non-normal portfolios. Revista Española de Financiación y Contabilidad 115:290-310.
  • POWNALL, R., y KOEDIJK, K. 1999. Capturing downside risk in fi nancial markets: the case of the asian crisis. Journal of International Money and Finance 18:853-870.
  • ROCKAFELLAR, R. T., y URYASEV, S. 2002. Conditional Value at Risk for General Loss Distributions, Journal of Banking and Finance 26(7):1443-1471.
  • SADORSKY, P., 2005. Stochastic volatility forecasting and risk management. Applied Financial Economics 15, 121-135.
  • SARMA, M., T. S., y SHAH, A. 2003. Selection of value at risk models. Journal of Forecasting 22, 337-358.
  • VAN DEN GOORBERGH, R. W. J. 1999. Value at Risk analysis and least squares tail index estimation. Research Memorandum WO & E, no. 578. Amsterdam: De Nederlandsche Bank.
  • VLAAR, P. J. G. 2000. Value at risk models for dutch bond portfolios. Journal of Banking and Finance 24 (7), 1131-1154.