Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1111.1113

Copula-based Hierarchical Aggregation of Correlated Risks. The behaviour of the diversification benefit in Gaussian and Lognormal Trees

Jean-Philippe Bruneton
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The benefits of diversifying risks are difficult to estimate quantitatively because of the uncertainties in the dependence structure between the risks. Also, the modelling of multidimensional dependencies is a non-trivial task. This paper focuses on one such technique for portfolio aggregation, namely the aggregation of risks within trees, where dependencies are set at each step of the aggregation with the help of some copulas. We define rigorously this procedure and then study extensively the Gaussian Tree of quite arbitrary size and shape, where individual risks are normal, and where the Gaussian copula is used. We derive exact analytical results for the diversification benefit of the Gaussian tree as a function of its shape and of the dependency parameters. Such a "toy-model" of an aggregation tree enables one to understand the basic phenomena's at play while aggregating risks in this way. In particular, it is shown that, for a fixed number of individual risks, "thin" trees diversify better than "fat" trees. Related to this, it is shown that hierarchical trees have the natural tendency to lower the overall dependency with respect to the dependency parameter chosen at each step of the aggregation. We also show that these results hold in more general cases outside the gaussian world, and apply notably to more realistic portfolios (LogNormal trees). We believe that any insurer or reinsurer using such a tool should be aware of these systematic effects, and that this awareness should strongly call for designing trees that adequately fit the business. We finally address the issue of specifying the full joint distribution between the risks. We show that the hierarchical mechanism does not require nor specify the joint distribution, but that the latter can be determined exactly (in the Gaussian case) by adding conditional independence hypotheses between the risks and their sums.

Explore related subjects

q-fin.RMq-fin.CPq-fin.PMq-fin.ST

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jean-Philippe Bruneton. 2011-11-04. Copula-based Hierarchical Aggregation of Correlated Risks. The behaviour of the diversification benefit in Gaussian and Lognormal Trees. https://arxiv.org/abs/1111.1113

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Simplifying Cyber Cat(astrophe)s with Cyber Kittens: Power Law Plausibility for Cyber Insurance Risks

Cyber insurance requires accurate modeling of worst-case catastrophic (cat) events, but the field lacks robust quantitative approaches for estimating upper-bound losses. Building on a recent dataset of 24 cyber cat events over 30 years, this work tests whether cyber economic losses follow a power law distribution. We analyze "cyber kittens" - sub-1B USD events distinguished from cat events (1B+ USD) only by magnitude - extracted via LLM from cyber insurance claims data (2020-2024). Using victim count (weighted by claim year) as a proxy for economic loss, we link kitten-sized events to known cat events to estimate losses. The kitten distribution proved consistent with the cat dataset, and power laws were statistically plausible: each order-of-magnitude increase in event size corresponds to a 5-7x drop in probability. Extrapolating, an event 100x the largest 2020-2024 cat event is expected roughly every 206 years, translating to 100-250B USD in losses - catastrophic, but not extraordinary relative to other insurance lines.

q-fin.RM↗
arXiv2026

Pricing the DeFi Tail: Do Protocols or Depositors Price Operational Risk?

Similar to banks, DeFi protocols expose depositors to operational risk (USD 9.45 billion across 1,075 events since 2020). Unlike banks, they are not required to hold capital against it. A protocol may maintain a buffer voluntarily. Absent one, the risk falls on the depositor, who should then demand a risk premium in the supply yield. I quantify the underlying tail on one benchmark, a per-sector Basel loss-distribution approach fitted to a new operational risk event dataset, and test both margins against it. Tails in the four core sectors are no heavier than the Moscadelli banking band $[0.85, 1.39]$. Bridge, Derivatives, and the residual Other sector exhibit cyber-loss-level tails ($\hat\xi \approx 1.6$), with point estimates past the infinite-mean boundary. The Lending tail implies a $\mathrm{VaR}_{99.9}$ capital buffer of 18% of TVL and of the ten largest Lending venues, the four holding a buffer cover on average 5% of it. Under market discipline, depositors should demand a higher yield in compensation where a venue does not maintain a buffer. I find that venues without a buffer pay a higher premium than those with (a 125-bps gap in medians): evidence the market discriminates in the right direction. However, the premium falls far short of an adequately priced tail. This unpriced tail falls disproportionately on the retail depositor, who sees only the posted rate but lacks the information and skills to price it. Because these products are not bank-regulated, I recommend disclosure over capital mandates: protocols, and any service providers that front access to it, should publish standardized losses, existing capital buffers and tail coverage.

q-fin.RM↗
arXiv2026

Illiquidity at Risk

Market efficiency relies fundamentally on stable liquidity. Consequently, forecasting liquidity dynamics is a priority for both investors and regulators. We introduce a new tail-risk metric, Illiquidity-at-Risk (IlliQaR), designed to quantify the magnitude of extreme liquidity dry-ups. Relying upon the realized Amihud (a precise illiquidity measurement derived from high-frequency data as the ratio of realized volatility to trading volume) we assess the predictive power of various linear and non-linear econometric models, with a specific focus on the impact of discontinuous jump components. Accounting for these jumps is essential for achieving accurate probability coverage and better IlliQaR predictions during periods of systemic stress, where standard continuous models systematically underestimate the severity of liquidity evaporation. Our empirical analysis, encompassing the S&P 500 index and a cross-section of 25 large U.S. equities, demonstrates that incorporating jumps significantly improves forecasts of illiquidity. Our results suggest that individual stock IlliQaR violations often cluster during periods of S&P 500 liquidity stress. This indicates that Illiquidity at Risk is not just a localized concern but a systemic one, where the main index acts as a leading indicator for extreme dry-ups in individual stock liquidity.

q-fin.RM↗