medium · Frm Part 2 Market Risk
A Chief Risk Officer (CRO) is reviewing backtesting results where the Kupiec test failed to reject the model (p = 0.45), but the Christoffersen joint test rejected the model (p = 0.02).
What is the most likely structural cause for this discrepancy?
- The bank is using hypothetical P&L instead of actual P&L for the backtest
- The positions in the portfolio are primarily deep out-of-the-money long options
- The model uses an EWMA volatility engine with a very high decay factor (λ = 0.999)
- The model uses a GARCH(1,1) process that aggressively updates volatility daily
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More Frm Part 2 Market Risk practice
- A leptokurtic distribution, often modeled by EVT, is characterized by which of the followi
- If a bank records 11 exceptions in a 250-day backtesting window for 99% VaR, what is the r
- In the GPD framework, if the threshold u is chosen too low, what is the most likely error
- In the Kupiec Likelihood Ratio test, what does the null hypothesis (H_0) state?
- The Hill estimator is primarily used to provide a direct estimate of which parameter?
- What happens to the mean of a GPD-distributed variable if the tail index ξ ≥ 1?
- What happens to the VaR estimate if we move from a thin-tailed (Gumbel, ξ = 0) model to a
- What is the base capital multiplier (m) applied to a bank's internal model market risk cap