Marginal Incremental and Component VaR (Solved Example)(FRM Part 2, Book 5, Investment & Risk Mgmt)

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ส.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 18

  • @finRGB
    @finRGB  3 ปีที่แล้ว

    FRM Learning Objective: Define, calculate, and distinguish between the following portfolio VaR measures: diversified and undiversified portfolio VaR, individual VaR, incremental VaR, marginal VaR, and component VaR.

  • @adityaparakh2964
    @adityaparakh2964 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Very Well explained

  • @fabricejuru
    @fabricejuru 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great explanation

  • @anthonysynott1516
    @anthonysynott1516 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Super helpful example thanks

  • @alexharris8652
    @alexharris8652 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Really good video

    • @finRGB
      @finRGB  2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Thank you for the appreciation, Alex.

  • @andrewchung83
    @andrewchung83 ปีที่แล้ว

    super helpful! If i have a portfolio with many different assets (including derivatives, swaps, bonds, equities, commodities) etc. and I am able to calculate the portfolio VaR as well as marginal VaR per risk type (eq/commodities/int rate/credit/volatilites), how can i get each risk type's component VaR? how can i scale the marginal VaR in this instance.

  • @iamtony55
    @iamtony55 ปีที่แล้ว

    I can understand how to calculate the beta value?

  • @giulioc.6066
    @giulioc.6066 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for the video! A question. For Stock A (negative position) shouldn't the Component VaR be negative? Should portfolio VaR decrease?
    Example, if my portfolio is 8000+2000 and VaR is -10%, if I have 8,000 and -2000 VaR should be lower than 10%, correct? So for example VaRa = -12% and VaRb = +2%... -12+2 = -10%
    Can you help me?

    • @finRGB
      @finRGB  ปีที่แล้ว

      Hello Giulio. The component VaR of stock A is positive because both its weight and beta are negative. Therefore, Component VaR of A = PortfolioVaR(%) * Weight A * Beta A is positive.
      Another way to explain this is by interpreting component VaR as risk contribution. The component VaR of stock A measures how much its position contributes to the portfolio risk. Since the returns of the two stocks are negatively correlated, including a long position in stock A (of say +5000) to a portfolio containing stock B would have reduced the portfolio risk. But a short position in stock A does the opposite: it increases the portfolio risk. Hence, the component VaR of stock A is positive.

    • @giulioc.6066
      @giulioc.6066 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@finRGB ok perfect, so if beta had been positive (with negative weight), then the component var would have been negative. it is clear thank you very much

  • @Luis-zy4nh
    @Luis-zy4nh 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Nice video! What happens if the value of position in stock A is -20.000? By the formula, the VaR would be 0, but the stocks are not 100% correlated.

    • @finRGB
      @finRGB  2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hello Luis. When stock A has an exposure of -20,000 the total value of portfolio will be zero. In that case, the individual VaR for stock A position will be 1914 (four times the value given in the question, since position is four times as much) and VaR for overall portfolio can be calculated using the formula given below:
      sqrt(VaRA^2 + VaRB^2 + 2*sign(x1)*sign(x2)*VaRA*VaRB*Corr12)
      which you can check comes out to 1993.2.

  • @TheHawkingSolutionHD
    @TheHawkingSolutionHD ปีที่แล้ว

    I tried to replicate this example and calculated delta VaR of the portfolio and get 90,95 as you. However, when calculating the marginal VaRi you would get 90,95/(-1000) = -0,091 and 90,95/1000 = 0,091. Using this, my cvar1 is 454,75 and cvar2 is 1819. They do not sum up to the VaR of the portfolio. Where is my mistake?

    • @finRGB
      @finRGB  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Your mistake is that the 90.95 (change in VaR) that you have used for calculating the MVaR occurs when BOTH stock positions have been altered. MVaR for any position should be calculated by shifting the exposure of that position by a tiny amount "keeping the exposure of all other positions unchanged".

    • @TheHawkingSolutionHD
      @TheHawkingSolutionHD ปีที่แล้ว

      @@finRGB Thank you. I have recalculated the example and get mvar1=-0.0785 and mvar2=0.0137. When calculating the contributions cvar1=392.393 and cvar2=273.188. When I add up the cvars I should come up to 650, but I get 665.58 instead. How can this be explained?

    • @finRGB
      @finRGB  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@TheHawkingSolutionHD It seems your bump in exposure to calculate MVaR is not "tiny". The current portfolio vol is 2.6299% and hence, VaR is 650.9036. If you recalculate portfolio VaR for exposures -4999 and 20000 (i.e. exposure for stock A bumped up by $1 and for stock B unchanged), the new portfolio vol comes to 2.6294% and hence, VaR comes out to be 650.8274. The change in VaR is -0.07617 which is the MVaR for stock A in the video.

    • @TheHawkingSolutionHD
      @TheHawkingSolutionHD ปีที่แล้ว

      @@finRGB Thats it, I calculated the MVaR with the change of 1000. I got the solution using a tiny amount of change. Thanks you so much and for the great explanation!