跳到正文
← 返回论文列表与筛选
阅读说明

本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。

DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。

引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。

关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。

分类依据与纠错

AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要直接围绕系统损失的条件分位数、CoVaR 与金融机构系统性风险推断。

反馈分类问题

正在核对关联版本…

代码、数据与补充材料

正在核对对应版本的资源…

关注这篇论文的作者
Xuan Leng
Yi He
Yanxi Hou
Liang Peng

两步分位数回归中 CoVaR 推断的渐近理论

研究问题
用两步分位数回归估计系统性风险指标 CoVaR 时,经典正则条件是否适用,如何在更弱条件下建立有效推断?
方法与思路
作者提出检验以评估经典分位数回归条件,在更弱条件下发展 CoVaR 渐近理论,并以随机加权 bootstrap 量化推断不确定性。
材料陈述的贡献
摘要称,重访既有数据揭示经典条件可能不现实,并提供更弱条件下的推断理论,考察检验尺寸、功效及置信区间覆盖率。
阅读关注点
应核对弱化了哪些正则条件、两步估计误差如何传递、随机加权 bootstrap 的有效性,以及不同机构和时期的区间解释。
阅读边界
仅据所给 RePEc 出版社摘要解读;弱条件具体形式、检验及覆盖率数值未说明,不能据此判断特定机构的系统性风险水平。

原文摘要

Measuring systemic risk has been an important topic in recent research on risk management. Adrian and Brunnermeier (2016) pioneered the CoVaR measure for systemic risk, which is defined as the conditional quantile of system loss given some state predictors and one stress event of an individual loss at a certain risk level. They proposed to estimate CoVaR by a two-quantile-regression approach, which is simple and easy to implement in practice, but without stating or developing the necessary asymptotic theory. In this paper, we develop tests to reveal that using the classical regularity condition in quantile regressions for the two-quantile-regression model may be unrealistic by revisiting the datasets in Adrian and Brunnermeier (2016). Under the proposed weaker conditions, we further develop the asymptotic theory of the CoVaR inference and introduce a random weighted bootstrap method to quantify the inference uncertainty. We examine the finite sample performance of the proposed tests in terms of size and power, as well as the coverage probabilities of confidence intervals for CoVaR. Finally, we demonstrate the CoVaR inference across financial institutions and time.

笔记与分组