MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantile-based modeling of scale dynamics in financial returns for Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall forecasting

2025· article· en· W7117487734 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Forecasting · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDownside riskQuantileExpected shortfallLeverage effectValue at riskStock (firearms)Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityLeverage (statistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a semiparametric approach for forecasting Value-at-Risk (VaR) and Expected Shortfall (ES) by modeling the conditional scale of financial returns, defined as the difference between two specified quantiles, via restricted quantile regression. Focusing on downside risk, VaR is derived from the left-tail quantile of rescaled returns, and ES is approximated by averaging quantiles below the VaR level. The method delivers robust, distribution-free estimates of extreme losses and captures skewness, heavy tails, and leverage effects. Simulation experiments and empirical analysis show that it often outperforms established models, including GARCH and joint VaR-ES conditional-quantile approaches. An application to daily returns on major international stock indices, spanning the COVID-19 period, highlights its effectiveness in capturing risk dynamics.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.214 · 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