MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409279500 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18040203

Modelling Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall for a Small Capital Market: Do Fractionally Integrated Models and Regime Shifts Matter?

2025· article· en· W4409279500 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wafa Souffargi, Adel Boubaker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpected shortfallEconomicsValue at riskValue (mathematics)EconometricsFinancial economicsRisk managementMathematicsStatisticsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we examine the relevance of the coexistence of structural change and long memory to model and forecast the volatility of Tunisian stock returns and to deliver a more accurate measure of risk along the lines of VaR and expected shortfall. To this end, we propose three time-series models that incorporate long-term dependence on the level and volatility of returns. In addition, we introduce structural change points using the iterated cumulative sums of squares (ICSS) and the modified ICSS algorithms, synonymous with stock market turbulence, into the conditional variance equations of the models studied. We choose a conditional innovation density function other than the normal distribution, that is, a Student distribution, to account for excess kurtosis. The empirical results show that the inclusion of structural breakpoints in the conditional variance equation and Dual LM provides better short- and long-term predictability. Within such a framework, the ICSS-ARFIMA-HYGARCH model with Student’s t distribution was able to account for the long-term dependence in the level and volatility of TUNINDEX index returns, excess kurtosis, and structural changes, delivering an accurate estimator of VaR and expected shortfall.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207