Log in

Efficient Simulation of Value-at-Risk Under a Jump Diffusion Model: A New Method for Moderate Deviation Events

  • Published:
Computational Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Importance sampling is a powerful variance reduction technique for rare event simulation, and can be applied to evaluate a portfolio’s Value-at-Risk (VaR). By adding a jump term in the geometric Brownian motion, the jump diffusion model can be used to describe abnormal changes in asset prices when there is a serious event in the market. In this paper, we propose an importance sampling algorithm to compute the portfolio’s VaR under a multi-variate jump diffusion model. To be more precise, an efficient computational procedure is developed for estimating the portfolio loss probability for those assets with jump risks. And the tilting measure can be separated for the diffusion and the jump part under the assumption of independence. The simulation results show that the efficiency of importance sampling improves over the naive Monte Carlo simulation from 9 to 277 times under various situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Because the VaR calculation in this example is one period, we simply need to simulate the return processes at the last time of consideration, but not the whole paths of the return processes. As a result, Euler discretisation is not necessary. As a remark, it is known that when the jump frequency \(\lambda \) gets bigger and the discretisation period \(\Delta t\) gets longer, then the discretisation error gets bigger with the same sample size, cf. http://marcoage.usuarios.rdc.pucrio.br/sim_stoc_proc.html. The discretisation issue may arise for multi-period VaR calculation, which is beyond the scope of this example.

References

  • Asmussen, S., & Glynn, P. (2007). Stochastic simulation: Algorithms and analysis. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beran, R. (1987). Prepivoting to reduce level error of confidence sets. Biometrika, 74, 457–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beran, R., & Millar, P. W. (1986). Confidence sets for a multivariate distribution. Annals of Statistics, 14, 431–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucklew, J. A. (2004). Introduction to rare event simulation. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Davison, A. C. (1988). Discussion of papers by D. V. Hinkley and by T. J. DiCiccio & J. P. Romano. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 50, 356–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Do, K. A., & Hall, P. (1991). On importance resampling for the bootstrap. Biometrika, 78, 161–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffie, D., & Singleton, J. (2003). Credit risk. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuh, C. D., & Hu, I. (2004). Efficient importance sampling for events of moderate deviations with applications. Biometrika, 91, 471–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuh, C. D., & Hu, I. (2007). Estimation in hidden Markov models via efficient importance sampling. Bernoulli, 13, 492–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuh, C. D., Hu, I., Hsu, Y. H., & Wang, R. H. (2011). Efficient simulation of value at risk with heavy-tailed risk factors. Operations Research, 59, 1395–1406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasserman, P. (2004). Monte carlo methods in financial engineering. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glasserman, P., Heidelberger, P., & Shahabuddin, P. (2000). Variance reduction techniques for estimating Value-at-Risk. Management Science, 46, 1349–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glasserman, P., Heidelberger, P., & Shahabuddin, P. (2002). Portfolio Value-at-Risk with heavy-tailed risk factors. Mathematical Finance, 12, 239–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. (1987). On the bootstrap and likelihood-based confidence regions. Biometrika, 74, 481–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. (1992). The bootstrap and edgeworth expansion. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heidelberger, P. (1995). Fast simulation of rare events in queueing and reliability models. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 5, 43–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johns, M. V. (1988). Importance sampling for bootstrap conference intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83, 709–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorion, P. (2001). Value-at-Risk. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kou, S. G. (2002). A jump diffusion model for option pricing. Management Science, 48, 1086–1101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay, B. G. (1988). Composite likelihood methods. Contemporary Mathematics, 80, 221–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, J. (2001). Monte carlo strategies in scientific computing. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. C. (1976). Option pricing when underlying stock returns are discontinuous. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 125–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naik, V., & Lee, M. (1990). General equilibrium pricing of options on the market portfolio with discontinuous return. Review of Financial Studies, 3, 493–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ney, P. (1983). Dominating points and the asymptotics of large deviations for random walk on \(\cal{R}^d\). Annals of Probability, 11, 158–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadowsky, J., & Bucklew, J. A. (1990). On large deviations theory and asymptotically efficient Monte Carlo simulation. IEEE Transition of Information Theory, 36, 579–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegmund, D. (1976). Importance sampling in the Monte Carlo study of sequential tests. Annals of Statistics, 4, 673–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research of the first author is supported in part by a Grant NSC 100-2118-M-008-002-MY3 and NSC 101-3113-P-008-005, the second author is supported in part by a Grant NSC 102-2118-M-008-002, and the third author is supported in part by a Grant NSC 100-2410-H-032-024.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ren-Her Wang.

Appendix: Proofs

Appendix: Proofs

Proof

(Proof of Proposition 1) We first note that \(\psi (\theta )\) is the cumulant generating function of X, and therefore its second derivative \(\psi ''(\theta )>0\) for \(\theta \in \mathbf{I}\). This implies that \(\psi '(\theta )\) is strictly increasing. Since \(\Psi (\theta )\) is convex and steep by assumption, we have \(\psi '(\theta ) \rightarrow \infty \) as \(\theta \rightarrow \theta _{\max }\). Furthermore, consider the conditional measure of \(\bar{Q}\) on the set A, denoted by \(\bar{Q}_A\), which is defined as

$$\begin{aligned} d{\bar{Q}}_A = \frac{\mathbf{1 }_{\{X\in A \}} d{\bar{Q}}}{ \int {\mathbf{1}}_{\{X\in A\}} d{\bar{Q}}}. \end{aligned}$$
(28)

Then we have

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{d E_{\bar{Q}_\theta }[X|X\in A]}{d\theta }= & {} \frac{d}{d\theta }\left( \frac{E[\mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} X \text {e}^{-\theta X}]}{E[\mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} \text {e}^{-\theta X}]}\right) \nonumber \\= & {} -\frac{E[\mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} X^2\text {e}^{-\theta X}]}{E[ \mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} \text {e}^{-\theta X}]} + \frac{E^2 [\mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} X \text {e}^{-\theta X}]}{E^2[ \mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} \text {e}^{-\theta X}]} =-\mathrm{var}_{\bar{Q}_A}(X) < 0.\nonumber \\ \end{aligned}$$
(29)

Since under the assumption in Proposition 1, the second and third terms in (29) are bounded for all \(\theta \in \mathbf{I}\), by Fubini’s theorem, the second equality in (29) holds. This implies that \(E_{\bar{Q}_\theta }[X|X\in A]\) is strictly decreasing. \(\square \)

Proof

(Proof of Theorem 1 ) The existence of the optimization problem (3) requires the following fact,

$$\begin{aligned} \psi '(\theta ) ~\mathrm{is~ strictly ~increasing~and}~E_{\bar{Q}}[X|X\in A]~\mathrm{is~strictly~decreasing}, \end{aligned}$$
(30)

which has been proved in Proposition 1.

The existence of the optimization problem (3) follows from \(E_{\bar{Q}_0}[X|X\in A] = E[X|X\in A] > \mu = \psi '(0)\).

To prove the uniqueness, we note that the second derivative of G equals

$$\begin{aligned} \displaystyle \frac{d^2 G(\theta )}{d \theta ^2}= & {} \frac{d^2}{d \theta ^2} E\left[ \mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} \frac{d P}{d Q}\right] =\frac{d^2}{d \theta ^2}E\left[ \mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}}e^{-\theta {X}+\psi (\theta )}\right] \nonumber \\= & {} \frac{d}{d \theta } E{\left[ \mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}} (+\psi '(\theta ))e^{-\theta {X}+\psi (\theta )}\right] } \nonumber \\= & {} E{\left[ \mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}}((-X+\psi '(\theta ))^2+\psi ''(\theta ))e^{-\theta {X}+\psi (\theta )}\right] }. \end{aligned}$$
(31)

Since \(\psi (\theta )\) is the cumulant generating function of X, its second derivative \(\psi ''(\theta )>0\). It then follows from (31) that \(\frac{d^2 G(\theta )}{d \theta ^2}>0\), which implies that there exists a unique minimum of \(G(\theta )\).

To prove (8), we need to simplify the RHS of (5) under \(\bar{Q}\). Standard algebra gives

$$\begin{aligned} \frac{E[\mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}}X\text{ e }^{-\theta X}]}{E[\mathbf 1 _{\{X\in A\}}\text{ e }^{-\theta X}]}= \frac{\int \mathbf 1 _{\{x\in A\}}x\text{ e }^{-\theta x} dP / \tilde{\Psi }(\theta )}{\int \mathbf 1 _{\{x\in A\}}\text{ e }^{-\theta x} dP/ \tilde{\Psi }(\theta )} = \frac{\int \mathbf 1 _{\{x\in A\}}x d\bar{Q}}{\int \mathbf 1 _{\{x\in A\}}d\bar{Q}}. \end{aligned}$$
(32)

As a result, (32) equals

$$\begin{aligned} \int \mathbf 1 _{\{x\in A\}} x d\bar{Q}_A = E_{\bar{Q}_A}[X]= E_{\bar{Q}}[X|X\in A], \end{aligned}$$

which implies the desired result. \(\square \)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fuh, CD., Teng, HW. & Wang, RH. Efficient Simulation of Value-at-Risk Under a Jump Diffusion Model: A New Method for Moderate Deviation Events. Comput Econ 51, 973–990 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-017-9654-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-017-9654-z

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation