medium · FRM Part 2 Credit Risk
In the context of the Merton model, why is the 'Distance to Default' (DD) usually mapped to an empirical distribution rather than using the standard normal cumulative distribution function (Φ)?
- The normal distribution's tail is considered much too fat, so it overstates the true probability of rare default events.
- The normal distribution model simply cannot properly account for changes in the prevailing risk-free interest rate term structure.
- The normal distribution wrongly assumes that a firm's underlying asset values could become negative at some point, which is economically impossible.
- Empirical default frequencies show that default probabilities are higher for a given z-score than the normal distribution would predict.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More FRM Part 2 Credit Risk practice
- If the Area Under the Curve (AUC) from the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) is 0.85
- According to the structural Merton model, the equity of a levered firm can be viewed as wh
- A bank utilizes a 'through-the-cycle' (TTC) rating system. During a sharp economic downtur
- A Merton-style structural credit model treats a firm's equit… — In this framework, what do
- What is the primary reason why risk-neutral probabilities of default (PD) extracted from c
- A bank's internal model for Credit Value Adjustment (CVA) us… — Why is this required by re
- Which resource is typically the second to be utilized after the defaulting member's own in
- If the exposure is $100,000 and the LGD is 50%, what is the implied Probability of Default