MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162142478 · doi:10.3905/jod.2008.707207

Dynamic Models of Portfolio Credit Risk

2008· article· en· W2162142478 on OpenAlexaff
John C. Hull, Alan White

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Derivatives · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollateralized debt obligationCredit derivativePortfolioCredit valuation adjustmentiTraxxTrancheSynthetic CDOCredit riskCredit default swap indexValuation (finance)Copula (linguistics)DefaultEconometricsEconomicsActuarial scienceFinancial economicsFinanceCollateral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Valuing portfolio credit derivatives, such as CDO tranches based on a broad portfolio of credits, like the CDX.NA.IG index portfolio with 125 investment grade names, remains a very difficult problem. Only approximate and imperfect solutions are available so far. The industry standard Gaussian copula model has several known shortcomings, including the fact that it is a static model which does not offer a clear way to tie together valuation for CDO tranches with different maturities, and it doesn9t generate wide enough spreads to match market prices for the supersenior tranches. Efforts to make the default hazard rate dynamic by modeling it as a diffusion run into the second difficulty when the models are calibrated to market prices. This article introduces a dynamic process for the cumulative hazard rate for a credit portfolio, that allows discrete jumps with jump size increasing in the number of jumps. This approach ties together the market quotes for CDO tranches of different maturities into a unified valuation framework. It also can generate large enough default intensity once several defaults have occurred to produce default risk on the senior and supersenior tranches of the magnitude that the market seems to be incorporating into their prices. TOPICS:Credit default swaps, factor-based models, CLOs, CDOs, and other structured credit

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of DerivativesSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207