CoCDaR and mCoCDaR: New Approach for Measurement of Systemic Risk Contributions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Systemic risk is the risk that the distress of one or more institutions trigger a collapse of the entire financial system. We extend CoVaR (value-at-risk conditioned on an institution) and CoCVaR (conditional value-at-risk conditioned on an institution) systemic risk contribution measures and propose a new CoCDaR (conditional drawdown-at-risk conditioned on an institution) measure based on drawdowns. This new measure accounts for consecutive negative returns of a security, while CoVaR and CoCVaR combine together negative returns from different time periods. For instance, ten 2% consecutive losses resulting in 20% drawdown will be noticed by CoCDaR, while CoVaR and CoCVaR are not sensitive to relatively small one period losses. The proposed measure provides insights for systemic risks under extreme stresses related to drawdowns. CoCDaR and its multivariate version, mCoCDaR, estimate an impact on big cumulative losses of the entire financial system caused by an individual firm’s distress. It can be used for ranking individual systemic risk contributions of financial institutions (banks). CoCDaR and mCoCDaR are computed with CVaR regression of drawdowns. Moreover, mCoCDaR can be used to estimate drawdowns of a security as a function of some other factors. For instance, we show how to perform fund drawdown style classification depending on drawdowns of indices. Case study results, data, and codes are posted on the web.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".