The COSO Framework for Internal Control
February 12, 2025
Individuals should work in teams at workplaces so that the work is accomplished at a much faster rate and errors are reduced to a large extent. A single human being takes more time to complete a task as compared to individuals working in a team. In a team people can discuss issues among themselves and […]
How Modern Decision Makers Have to Confront Present Shock and Information Overload We live in times when Information Overload is getting the better of cognitive abilities to absorb and process the needed data and information to make informed decisions. In addition, the Digital Age has also engendered the Present Shock of Virality and Instant Gratification […]
A team comprises of two or more than two people grouped to achieve a common objective or a goal. On the other hand, High-Performance Teams are objectively more focused in approach and better than the usual work teams. The members of a High-Performance Teamwork towards the achievement of synergies in business outcomes and attainment of […]
Work Politics in certain cases can also develop inner skills of an individual. Let us find out how office politics sometimes can also help individuals hone their skills: An individual indulges in politics when he is not secure about his job. He tries his level best to tarnish the reputation of his fellow worker and […]
Most reinsurance treaties are structured in an excess of loss format. This means that the reinsurer is liable to pay the ceding insurer only when losses exceed a certain amount. For example, the reinsurer is liable to pay the ceding insurer all losses which are above $1 million. If the losses are below $1 million, […]
In the previous articles, we have discussed the details about the concept of value at risk (VaR) as well as the theoretical calculation of value at risk (VaR). The theoretical portion of the model is easy to understand. However, it needs to be understood that this is not how the model is actually implemented in real life. In this article, we will have a closer look at some of the complications faced while implementing the value at risk (VaR) model.
Theoretically, the value at risk (VaR) model proposes that each asset should be considered separately. This means that if a company has a hundred different types of bonds, then they should run the value at risk (VaR) model for all of them. However, in real life, this becomes a challenge.
This is because it is common for companies to have hundreds or even thousands of different types of securities. As such, computing the value at risk (VaR) by inputting values for each individual asset becomes a computational challenge. However, nowadays, computing power is available fairly cheaply. Hence, it would be possible for companies to tremendously scale up their computational power without having a proportional impact on their budget.
However, computational power is not the only challenge. If there are hundreds of assets, then the details of these hundreds of assets also have to be entered into the model. Deriving and maintaining data related to hundreds of assets and the various correlations between them can be a challenge. Firstly, a lot of time, money, and resources will have to be allocated to this task. Secondly, the complexity may be needless since spending more time and money may not necessarily improve the accuracy of the model.
Therefore, during the implementation of the value at risk (VaR) model, every company faces the same problem. They need to group assets together in order to reduce the asset types. However, they also need to ensure that the accuracy of the model is not compromised while doing so. Hence, the grouping has to be done in an intelligent manner.
The concept of sensitivity is not really new to traders. They have been unofficially using this method to manage risks for a long time now. This method of grouping assets has been found to be most effective since it does not compromise the integrity and accuracy of the model.
However, this model requires a tremendous understanding of the various types of risks that an organization faces. The initial setup of the model will be quite difficult. However, once a model has been put into place, it may be easy to add assets to or remove assets from a particular risk factor group. Using this approach hundreds or even thousands of assets can be mapped to a single group and the complexity can be greatly reduced.
As a part of this approach, the present value of the cash flow of the assets over a period of time is calculated. This present value is then mapped to different time horizons. Now, cash flows are all being expressed in terms of present value. Hence, they are additive! As a result, the organization does not have to maintain thousands of assets. This reduces the computational as well as the data collection complexity of the underlying model.
Mapping the various assets to risk factors will not be an error-free process. Many times, the organization may not be sure of the mapping. In such cases, they may have to make difficult choices. They must be aware of the two types of errors and their consequences.
The final decision should be taken to minimize the impact i.e. the lower value of type 1 or type 2 error must be selected.
The bottom line is that the practical implementation of value at risk (VaR) models is quite different as compared to the theoretical construct. A lot of different types of challenges may be faced while implementing the model.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *