Stress Testing

Interactive exploration of coherent stress testing, combining GARCH-based historical simulation scenarios with user-defined stress scenarios and probabilities

Stress Testing Integration

VaR and ES models are inherently backward looking: they assume past data are a good guide to near-future behavior. Stress testing is forward looking, considering extreme but plausible scenarios that may not appear in the historical record (Christoffersen 2012, chap. 13, section 6; Hull 2023, chap. 16).

Standard stress testing defines scenarios and evaluates their impact, but without assigning probabilities, it is unclear how the portfolio manager should react. Coherent stress testing solves this by assigning a probability \(\alpha\) to each stress scenario and combining the scenario distribution with the historical data:

\[ f_{comb}(\cdot) = \begin{cases} f(\cdot), & \text{with probability } (1-\alpha) \\ f_{stress}(\cdot), & \text{with probability } \alpha \end{cases} \]

Once scenario probabilities are assigned, we can compute VaR and ES from the combined distribution by ranking all scenarios (historical and stress) by loss, assigning their probabilities, and computing cumulative probabilities from the worst scenario to the best.

Note

Why assign probabilities? Without probabilities, the portfolio manager may overreact to an extremely unlikely scenario or underreact to a less extreme but more frequent one. Assigning probabilities also enables backtesting of the combined model.

Note

Historical scenarios. The historical simulation scenarios are generated from a GARCH(1,1) process: \(R_t = \sigma_t z_t\) with \(z_t \sim N(0,1)\) and \(\sigma^2_{t+1} = \omega + \alpha R_t^2 + \beta \sigma^2_t\). This produces realistic fat-tailed returns with volatility clustering, representing the “historical” data available to the risk manager. Losses are defined as \(-R_t\), so positive values represent adverse outcomes.

Tip

How to experiment

Start with the default 3 stress scenarios and observe where they fall in the ranked loss table relative to the historical simulation scenarios. Increase the loss magnitudes or probabilities of the stress scenarios and watch how VaR and ES shift. Try reducing the number of HS scenarios to 250 to see how stress scenarios gain more weight in the tail.

References

Christoffersen, Peter F. 2012. Elements of Financial Risk Management. 2nd ed. Academic Press.
Hull, John. 2023. Risk Management and Financial Institutions. 6th ed. John Wiley & Sons.