basic theoretical considerations of each
flavour of VaR (why CVaR, HVaR, etc can provide "different"
answers),
model verification of theoretical
formulations as well as well known "off-the-shelf" software
packages.
data integration and effects (e.g. how
choice of volatility surface generation may affect VaR),
assessment of the complete VaR loop from real-time
data » portfolio interface » VaR calculation » VaR audit
creation of manuals, materials and analytics to illustrate the effects of
various assumptions in the usage and implementation of VaR such as:
- effects of sample length, for various weighted averaging methods for
"calm" as well as "turbulent" market conditions
- effects of "indexing" VaR (such as CAPM, FX, correlation
along interest rate curves etc). For example, a CAPM based
implementation of a particular portfolio was reported to have effectively
twice the VaR as that of the non-CAPM based calculation under certain market
conditions.
- back testing analytics to illustrate the performance of VaR for real
portfolios and market conditions. So, if the VaR measure is set at 95%
confidence, do the P&L's actually lie below the 5% VaR-level 5% of the time;
if not than either the traders are being "over restricted" and so
not making the required returns. Or, alternatively, the firm is taking more risk than it had
intended for the expected level of returns. For example, a
particular portfolio breached the 5% limit only 2.4% (i.e. less risk than
VaR indicates) of the time over a 3-year (daily) VaR test, while another
portfolio breached the 5% limit 7.5% of the time (i.e. more risk than VaR
indicates).
- effects of drift (trending) vs. volatility (e.g. VaR measures
sometimes ignore drift, in the case that VaR measure is longer dated, such
approached will mis-specify the risk exposure) The Figure to the right
illustrates a surface that can be used as both the measure of market
conditions that require drift adjustment and the amount of the drift
adjustment) such as the in the Figure below
