MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382583755 · doi:10.3390/jrfm16070312

Estimating Value-at-Risk in the EURUSD Currency Cross from Implied Volatilities Using Machine Learning Methods and Quantile Regression

2023· article· en· W4382583755 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Herman Mørkved Blom, Petter Eilif de Lange, Morten Risstad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsQuantile regressionValue at riskArtificial neural networkBoosting (machine learning)CurrencyVolatility (finance)QuantileRegressionGradient boostingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEconomicsStatisticsRisk managementMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we propose a semiparametric, parsimonious value-at-risk forecasting model, based on quantile regression and machine learning methods, combined with readily available market prices of option contracts from the over-the-counter foreign exchange rate interbank market. We aim at improving existing methods for VaR prediction of currency investments using machine learning. We employ two different methods, i.e., ensemble methods and neural networks. Explanatory variables are implied volatilities with plausible economic interpretation. The forward-looking nature of the model, achieved by the application of implied volatilities as risk factors, ensures that new information is rapidly reflected in value-at-risk estimates. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to utilize information in the volatility surface, combined with machine learning and quantile regression, for VaR prediction of currency investments. The proposed ensemble models achieve good estimates across all quantiles. The light gradient boosting machine model and the categorical boosting model both yield estimates which are better than, or equal to, those of the benchmark model. In general, neural network models are quite unstable.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207