Comparison of Performance of Traditional Value at Risk Models with Switching Model in Tehran Stock Exchange

Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of the Accounting، Qeshm Branch، Islamic Azad University, Qeshm, Iran

2 Business Faculty, Tehran Central Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran (Corresponding author)

3 Associate Professor and Member of the Accounting Department and member of the Young Researchers Club Islamic Azad University of Islamshahr Branch Tehran. Iran


The problem of portfolio optimization has made many advances since Markowitz proposed an average-variance-based optimization. It can be said that the most important achievement of the Markowitz model was the introduction of variance as a risk indicator and indeed, the introduction of a quantitative benchmark into it. This research is a model for predicting value at risk. This model extends the previous methods to provide a prediction model for switching to increase the effectiveness of predictions. The switching model is explicitly designed to solve the problem with risk managers who do not trust a particular Value-At-Risk model and allows the model to calculate the value at risk in different times and conditions. In this study, predictive methods such as EWMA, historical simulation, Monte Carlo and constant variance model will be discussed. This approach is explicitly designed to predict the predictive problems of managers who do not estimate their estimates for a specific VaR model, and allows the estimated model to change over time. This approach assumes that investors at any point of time use only the historical information available to select a model, and that the choice of model is based on a pre-determined selection criterion, and then the choice of model used to predict value at a later date. The results of the research indicate that the switching model is highly desirable compared to other models over time.


1)       Ahoniemi, K., Fuertes, A.M., Olmo, J., 2015. Overnight news and daily equity trading limits. J. Financ. Econometrics 13 (1), 1-27.
2)       Billio, M., Pelizzon L., 2000. Value-at-Risk: a multivariate regime switching approach. J. Empirical Financ. 7 (5), 531-554.
3)       Christoffersen, P.F., 1998. Evaluating interval forecasts. Int. Econ. Rev. 39 (1), 841-862.
4)       Diebold, F.X., Mariano, R.S., 1995. Comparing predictive accuracy. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 13, 225-263.
5)       Drakos, A., Kouretas, G.P., Zarangas, L.P., 2010. Prediction financial volatility of the Athens stock exchange daily return: an application of the asymmetric normal mixture GARCH model. Int. J. Financ. Econ. 15 (2), 331-350.
6)       Fama, E.F., 1965. The behavior of stock market prices. J. Bus. 38, 34-105.
7)       Fuertes, A.M., Olmo, J., 2013. Optimally harnessing inter-day and intra-day information for daily Value-at-Risk Predication. Int. J. Prediction 29 (1), 28-42.
8)       Giacomini, R., Komunjer, I., 2005. Evaluation and combination of conditional quantile forecasts. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 23, 416-431.
9)       Hendricks, D., 1996. Evaluation of Value-at-Risk models using historical data. Fed Reserve N. Y. Econ. Policy Rev. 2, 39-69.
10)    Jorion, P., 2006. Value at Risk: the New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk, 3rd ed McGraw-Hill, New York.
11)    Khindarova, I., Rachev, S., Schwartz, E., 2001. Stable modeling of value at risk. Math. Comput. Model. 34 (1), 1223-1259.
12)    Kuester, K., Mittnik, S., Paolella, M.S., 2006. Value-at-Risk Prediction: a comparison of alternative strategies. J. Finance. Econometrics 4 (1), 53-89.
13)    Kupiec, P., 1995. Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk measurement models. J. Derivatives 3 (2), 73-84.
14)    Levy, P., 1925, Calcul des probabilities, Gauthier Villars.
15)    Lee, C.F., Su, J.B., 2011. Alternative statistical distributions for estimating Value-at-Risk: theory and evidence. Rev. Quant. Finance. Account. 41 (2), 225-251.
16)    Lopez, J.A., 1999. Methods for evaluating Value-at-Risk estimates. Fed. Reserve Bank San Franc. Econ. Rev. 2, 3-17.
17)    Mandelbrot, B.B., 1963. The variation of certain speculative prices. J. Bus. 36, 394-419.
18)    McCulloch, J.H., 1986. Simple consistent estimators of stable distribution parameters. Commun. Stat. – simulations 15 (1), 1109-1136.
19)    McCulloch, J.H., 1996. Financial applications of stable distribution. Handb. Stat. 14 (2), 393-425.
20)    McNeil, A., Frey, R., 2000. Estimation of tail-related risk measures for heteroscedastic financial time series: an extreme value approach. J. Empirical Financ. 56 (2), 271-300.
21)    J.P., Morgan, 1996. RiskMetrics Technical Document, 4th ed, New York.
22)    Pesaran, M.H., Timmermann, A., 1995. The robustness and economic significance of predictability of stock returns. J. Financ. 50 (2), 1201-1228.
23)    Sarma, M., Thomas, S., Shah, A., 2003. Selection of Value-at-Risk models. J. Prediction 22 (1), 337-358.
24)    Sener, E., Baronyan, S., Menguturk, L.A., 2012. Ranking the predictive performances of Value-at-Risk estimation methods. Int. J. Prediction 28 (2), 849-873.
25)    Sheather, S.J., Marron, J.S., 1990. Kernel quantile estimators. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 85 (2), 410-416.
26)    Silvapulle, P., Granger, C.W.J., 2001. Large returns, conditional correlation and portfolio diversification: a Value-at-Risk approach. Quantitative Finance. 1., 542-551.
27)    Silverman, B.W., 1986. Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall, London