BlackFriday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

PRMIA Exam 8010 Topic 1 Question 48 Discussion

Actual exam question for PRMIA's 8010 exam
Question #: 48
Topic #: 1
[All 8010 Questions]

Which of the following is not a limitation of the univariate Gaussian model to capture the codependence structure between risk factros used for VaR calculations?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

In the univariate Gaussian model, each risk factor is modeled separately independent of the others, and the dependence between the risk factors is captured by the covariance matrix (or its equivalent combination of the correlation matrix and the variance matrix). Risk factors could include interest rates of different tenors, different equity market levels etc.

While this is a simple enough model, it has a number of limitations.

First, it fails to fit to the empirical distributions of risk factors, notably their fat tails and skewness. Second, a single covariance matrix is insufficient to describe the fine codependence structure among risk factors as non-linear dependencies or tail correlations are not captured. Third, determining the covariance matrix becomes an extremely difficult task as the number of risk factors increases. The number of covariances increases by the square of the number of variables.

But an inability to capture linear relationships between the factors is not one of the limitations of the univariate Gaussian approach - in fact it is able to do that quite nicely with covariances.

A way to address these limitations is to consider joint distributions of the risk factors that capture the dynamic relationships between the risk factors, and that correlation is not a static number across an entire range of outcomes, but the risk factors can behave differently with each other at different intersection points.


Contribute your Thoughts:

Reed
5 months ago
Isn't the Gaussian model like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole? Of course it can't capture the real-world complexities. I vote for A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Remedios
5 months ago
Haha, I bet the exam writers were having a field day coming up with these options. But in all seriousness, I think D is the correct answer.
upvoted 0 times
Wilda
4 months ago
I think D is the best option too, it covers the limitations of the univariate Gaussian model well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gilma
4 months ago
Yeah, D makes sense because it mentions non-linear dependencies and tail correlations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dortha
5 months ago
I agree, D seems like the most accurate choice.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Kris
6 months ago
I'm going with B. As the number of risk factors increases, determining the covariance matrix becomes a nightmare. Who has time for that?
upvoted 0 times
Izetta
4 months ago
Definitely, it's a real challenge as the number of risk factors grows.
upvoted 0 times
...
Oliva
4 months ago
I agree, determining the covariance matrix with more risk factors is a hassle.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rosann
4 months ago
Definitely, it can be a nightmare to handle all those calculations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Devon
5 months ago
I agree, determining the covariance matrix for a large number of risk factors is a real challenge.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Daniel
6 months ago
D seems like the best answer to me. The covariance matrix alone is not enough to describe the complex codependence structure among risk factors.
upvoted 0 times
Amber
5 months ago
Yes, D is the most accurate choice. Non-linear dependencies and tail correlations are not captured by a single covariance matrix.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aileen
5 months ago
I agree, D is the correct answer. The covariance matrix is not sufficient to capture all the dependencies among risk factors.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ma
6 months ago
I think the correct answer is A. The Gaussian model fails to capture the empirical distribution of risk factors, which often exhibit fat tails and skewness.
upvoted 0 times
Otis
5 months ago
Determining the covariance matrix can indeed become very challenging as the number of risk factors increases.
upvoted 0 times
...
Meaghan
5 months ago
B
upvoted 0 times
...
Ollie
5 months ago
That's true. A single covariance matrix is not enough to capture all dependencies among risk factors.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gracia
5 months ago
Yeah, the Gaussian model doesn't fit the empirical distributions well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Frederica
6 months ago
I think the correct answer is A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gladys
6 months ago
D
upvoted 0 times
...
Therese
6 months ago
You are correct. The Gaussian model does struggle with fitting empirical distributions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorthy
6 months ago
A
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel