Modeling coherent trading risk parameters under illiquid market perspective

Emerald - Tập 28 Số 4 - Trang 301-320 - 2011
Mazin A.M.Al Janabi1
1Department of Economics and Finance, Faculty of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University, Al‐Ain, UAE

Tóm tắt

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to originate a proactive approach for the quantification and analysis of liquidity risk for trading portfolios that consist of multiple equity assets.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents a coherent modeling method whereby the holding periods are adjusted according to the specific needs of each trading portfolio. This adjustment can be attained for the entire portfolio or for any specific asset within the equity trading portfolio. This paper extends previous approaches by explicitly modeling the liquidation of trading portfolios, over the holding period, with the aid of an appropriate scaling of the multiple‐assets' liquidity‐adjusted value‐at‐risk matrix. The key methodological contribution is a different and less conservative liquidity scaling factor than the conventional root‐t multiplier.FindingsThe proposed coherent liquidity multiplier is a function of a predetermined liquidity threshold, defined as the maximum position which can be unwound without disturbing market prices during one trading day, and is quite straightforward to put into practice even by very large financial institutions and institutional portfolio managers. Furthermore, it is designed to accommodate all types of trading assets held and its simplicity stems from the fact that it focuses on the time‐volatility dimension of liquidity risk instead of the cost spread (bid‐ask margin) as most researchers have done heretofore.Practical implicationsUsing more than six years of daily return data, for the period 2004‐2009, of emerging Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) stock markets, the paper analyzes different structured and optimum trading portfolios and determine coherent risk exposure and liquidity risk premium under different illiquid and adverse market conditions and under the notion of different correlation factors.Originality/valueThis paper fills a main gap in market and liquidity risk management literatures by putting forward a thorough modeling of liquidity risk under the supposition of illiquid and adverse market settings. The empirical results are interesting in terms of theory as well as practical applications to trading units, asset management service entities and other financial institutions. This coherent modeling technique and empirical tests can aid the GCC financial markets and other emerging economies in devising contemporary internal risk models, particularly in light of the aftermaths of the recent sub‐prime financial crisis.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Al Janabi, M.A.M. (2008), “Integrating liquidity risk factor into a parametric value at risk method”, Journal of Trading, Summer, pp. 76‐87.

Al Janabi, M.A.M. (2009), “Market liquidity and strategic asset allocation: applications to GCC stock exchanges”, Middle East Development Journal, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 227‐54.

Al Janabi, M.A.M. (2010), “Incorporating asset liquidity effects in risk‐capital modeling”, Review of Middle East Economics and Finance, Vol. 6 No. 1 (Article 3).

Almgren, R. and Chriss, N. (1999), “Optimal execution of portfolio transaction”, working paper, Department of Mathematics, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Bangia, A., Diebold, F., Schuermann, T. and Stroughair, J. (1999), “Modeling liquidity risk with implications for traditional market risk measurement and management”, working paper, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.

Berkowitz, J. (2000), “Incorporating liquidity risk into VaR models”, working paper, Graduate School of Management, University of California, Irvine, CA.

Chordia, T., Subrahmanyam, A. and Anshuman, V. (2001), “Trading activities and expected stock returns”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 3‐32.

Dowd, K., Blake, D. and Cairns, A. (2004), “Long‐term value at risk”, The Journal of Risk Finance, Winter/Spring, pp. 52‐7.

Hisata, Y. and Yamai, Y. (2000), “Research toward the practical application of liquidity risk evaluation methods”, discussion paper, Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan, Tokyo.

Jarrow, R. and Subramanian, A. (1997), “Mopping up Liquidity”, Risk, Vol. 10 No. 12, pp. 170‐3.

Le Saout, E. (2002), “Incorporating liquidity risk in VaR models”, working paper, Paris 1 University, Paris.

Markowitz, H. (1959), Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments, Wiley, New York, NY.

Morgan Guaranty Trust Company (1994), RiskMetrics™ – Technical Document, Morgan Guaranty Trust Company, Global Research, New York, NY.

Pastor, L. and Stambaugh, R.F. (2003), “Liquidity risk and expected stock returns”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 111 No. 3, pp. 642‐85.

Roy, S. (2004), “Liquidity adjustment in VaR model: evidence from the Indian debt market”, Reserve Bank of India Occasional Papers, Vol. 25 Nos 1‐3, pp. 1‐16.

Shamroukh, N. (2000), “Modelling liquidity risk in VaR models”, working paper, Algorithmics, London.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Emerald

Tập 28 Số 4

301-320

Thông tin tác giả