Crash of 2008/Tutorials: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Nick Gardner
imported>Nick Gardner
Line 5: Line 5:
:''(for definitions of the terms shown in italics on this page see the glossary on the Related Articles subpage [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Crash_of_2008/Related_Articles]]
:''(for definitions of the terms shown in italics on this page see the glossary on the Related Articles subpage [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Crash_of_2008/Related_Articles]]


===Risk-management shortcomings===
===Data limitations===
 
The data used to estimate risk probabilitie were subject to several limitations:
However all were based upon data from the period of historically low economic volatility that started in the early 1980s and came to be known as the "great moderation"  
* They were taken from the period of historically low economic volatility that started in the early 1980s and came to be known as the "great moderation"  
<ref>[http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/steven.davis/research/Interpreting_the_Great_Moderation,_NBER_version.pdf Stephen Davis and James Kahn: ''Interpreting the Great Moderation'', National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 14048, May 2008]</ref>.
<ref>[http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/steven.davis/research/Interpreting_the_Great_Moderation,_NBER_version.pdf Stephen Davis and James Kahn: ''Interpreting the Great Moderation'', National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 14048, May 2008]</ref>, and as such were applicable only on the assumption that such low volatility would continue.


<ref>[http://www.riskworx.com/insights/theory/theory.pdf] Barry du Toit ''Risk, theory, reflection: Limitations of the stochastic
<ref>[http://www.riskworx.com/insights/theory/theory.pdf] Barry du Toit ''Risk, theory, reflection: Limitations of the stochastic

Revision as of 09:44, 4 December 2008

This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Timelines [?]
Tutorials [?]
Addendum [?]
 
Tutorials relating to the topic of Crash of 2008.

Risk-management errors

(for definitions of the terms shown in italics on this page see the glossary on the Related Articles subpage [2]]

Data limitations

The data used to estimate risk probabilitie were subject to several limitations:

  • They were taken from the period of historically low economic volatility that started in the early 1980s and came to be known as the "great moderation"

[1], and as such were applicable only on the assumption that such low volatility would continue.

[2]

[3]

Tail risk

An explanation for risk-management errors that has been put forward by Andrew Haldane (Head of the Bank of England's Systemic Risk Assessment Department) [4] suggests that they arose from investors' and rating agencies' use of linear models based upon the CAPM (Capital Asset Pricing Model) [5]. Such models assume that risks can be represented by the symmetrical bell-shaped normal distribution, and can give inaccurate results if the true distribution has a "fat tail", as a result of which there is a significant additional tail risk. Earlier work by Raghuram Rajan (Director of Research at the International Monetary Fund) suggested that securitised assets may be expected to involve significant tail risks. [6] . Since the events involving such risks are by definition rare, they cannot be expected to be picked up by models based upon a five or six years' run of data.

Credit rating errors

Several reasons have been put forward for the errors made by the credit rating agencies. According to Frank Raiter (former Managing Director and Head of Residential Mortgage-backed Securities Rating at Standard and Poor's) his company had assessed default probabilities using a model based upon the analysis of 900,000 mortgages that had been implemented in 1996, and which did not, therefore, capture the changes in performance brought about by the subsequent increase in the numbers of subprime mortgages [7]. Later - improved and updated - models had been developed, but were not implemented because of budgetary constraints. A 2007 report to the Board of Moody's spoke of a conflict between ratings quality and the defence of market share, and of the danger that ratings of securities might be influenced by pressure from their issuers [8]. The president of another credit rating agency said the their ratings had been made on the assumption that there would be government financial support for any major company that ran into in difficulties [9].

References