• Graduate program
    • Why Tinbergen Institute?
    • Research Master
    • Admissions
    • Course Registration
    • Facilities
    • PhD Vacancies
    • Selected PhD Placements
    • Research Master Business Data Science
  • Research
  • Browse our Courses
  • Events
    • Summer School
      • Applied Public Policy Evaluation
      • Deep Learning
      • Economics of Blockchain and Digital Currencies
      • Economics of Climate Change
      • Foundations of Machine Learning with Applications in Python
      • From Preference to Choice: The Economic Theory of Decision-Making
      • Gender in Society
      • Machine Learning for Business
      • Marketing Research with Purpose
      • Sustainable Finance
      • Tuition Fees and Payment
      • Business Data Science Summer School Program
    • Events Calendar
    • Events Archive
    • Tinbergen Institute Lectures
    • 16th Tinbergen Institute Annual Conference
    • Annual Tinbergen Institute Conference
  • News
  • Alumni

Hurlin, C., Laurent, S., Quaedvlieg, R. and Smeekes, S. (2017). Risk Measure Inference Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 35(4):499--512.


  • Affiliated author
    Rogier Quaedvlieg
  • Publication year
    2017
  • Journal
    Journal of Business and Economic Statistics

We propose a bootstrap-based test of the null hypothesis of equality of two firms{\textquoteright} conditional Risk Measures (RMs) at a single point in time. The test can be applied to a wide class of conditional risk measures issued from parametric or semi-parametric models. Our iterative testing procedure produces a grouped ranking of the RMs, which has direct application for systemic risk analysis. Firms within a group are statistically indistinguishable form each other, but significantly more risky than the firms belonging to lower ranked groups. A Monte Carlo simulation demonstrates that our test has good size and power properties. We apply the procedure to a sample of 94 U.S. financial institutions using ?CoVaR, MES, and %SRISK. We find that for some periods and RMs, we cannot statistically distinguish the 40 most risky firms due to estimation uncertainty.