• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Value at Risk(Loss Distribution vs Gains distribution)_Sep2007(i)

E

Edwin

Member
For;

Investor 1;

P(R = r) = 0.96 if r = 1 & 0.04 if r = 0

thus R~Bernouli(p = 0.96)

Now define Y = 1000R
a) Var(Y) = 1000^2*Var(R) = 0.96*0.04*1000^2 = 38400
and the same can be done for measures b, c and d.

Investor 2

R is still the same i.e R ~ Bernoulli(p = 0.96)
But Y = R1 + R2+ ....+ R1000
i.e Y = ∑Ri ~ Bin(1000,0.96) Since Bin is a sum of INDEPENDENT Bernoulli trials !

Now the trick is with the ER. They have Y ~ Bin (1000, q =0.04). This is the probability distribution of the LOSSES i guess. Therefore to compute VaR we are concerned with the RIGHT tail of the distribution, hence P(Y>t) = 0.05.

Here VaR = 50.2 We are 95 % confident that we will not lose more than 50.2.

Note that had the ER proceded to find VaR = -t, P(Y<t) = 0.05. Then they would have used Y ~ Bin(1000,0.96) which is the probability distribution of the GAINS.

Here VaR = -949.81. We are 95% confident that we will not make less than 949.81 of profits.

Friends, please confirm if my understanding is right here, if so why did the Examiner's report use the probability distribution of Losses.

Would marks have been allocated if one worked with the distribution of gains i.e found that we are 95% confident that we will not make less than 949.81 of profits???
 
You say the Examiners have:

"VaR = 50.2. We are 95 % confident that we will not lose more than 50.2."

I agree with this.

You then say your approach gives:

"VaR = -949.81. We are 95% confident that we will not make less than 949.81 of profits."

I'm happy with your number, but you're interpreting it in the wrong way. This isn't a profit number, it's a portfoluio value. To get the profit, you need to compare it with the starting value of 1000. This will give you a profit of -50.19, which is the same as a loss of +50.19.

You ask:

"Friends, please confirm if my understanding is right here, if so why did the Examiner's report use the probability distribution of Losses.

Would marks have been allocated if one worked with the distribution of gains i.e found that we are 95% confident that we will not make less than 949.81 of profits???"

You can look at distribution of gains or losses - it doesn't matter. The only difference will be the sign of your final answer.

Stating you are 95% confident that we will not end up with less than 949.81 will get most of the marks, but not all as you're not stating the VaR, which is 50.19.

Stating you are 95% confident that we will not make less than 949.81 of profits is wrong and so you'll lose more marks than for the previous statement.
 
Thank you Mike Lewry, atleast I know I would have worked with the distribution of Bin(1000,0.96) which is a sum of the independent Bernoulli trials for investor 1 makes more sense.

And had my interpretation been correct like yours I would have gotten the same VaR. Sometimes the ER is there to confuse!

Thanks (a lot) Mike.
 
Back
Top