E-Backtesting Expected Shortfall without Value-at-Risk Forecasts under Time-series Models

By Ruodu Wang, Jingcheng Yu

Rating

1714
Battle Count: 50

Relevance

8/10
Highly relevant for risk managers and quantitative analysts responsible for validating tail risk models. It provides a method to monitor ES forecasts without needing VaR forecasts, which is crucial for regulatory compliance and internal risk control.

Implementation Complexity

7/10
The theoretical framework is complex (e-processes, infimum over nuisance parameters). The numerical implementation requires careful grid construction and adaptive interval subdivision for VaR profiling, though the paper provides specific grid settings and convergence proofs.

Reproducibility

3/5
The paper provides detailed algorithmic descriptions, parameter settings for simulations, and mathematical proofs. However, no public code repository URL is explicitly provided in the text. The NASDAQ data is public (FRED), and simulation parameters are fully specified.

Abstract

Expected Shortfall (ES) measures the average size of tail losses. Its sequential backtests typically also require a Value-at-Risk (VaR) forecast. We develop two e-backtesting methods using only observed losses and ES forecasts: one for iid losses only and the other for time series under an AR-GARCH conditional VaR structure. Under the stated assumptions, both control false rejections at any stopping time. For the time-series method, validity requires a fixed parameter–quantile pair representing the conditional VaR path and a positive report margin. The time-series statistic takes an infimum over possible parameter and VaR values. We choose the betting process (λ_t) by maximizing an empirical growth rate averaged across candidate parameters. We compute the statistic by continuous VaR profiling on a dense parameter grid. For grid approximations, we prove convergence to the continuous infimum, together with convergence of the probability of false rejection, as the grid is refined over a fixed monitoring period. Lower and upper bounds for the VaR infimum on the parameter grid control the accuracy of the numerical profiling. Simulations, including ES reports that change from over-reporting to under-reporting, and an application to daily NASDAQ losses provide numerical comparisons with VaR–ES e-processes and fixed-sample ES backtests, assessing detection frequencies and the timing of rejections.

The interactive Everscope explorer (charts, battles, favorites) loads below.