Claudiu Ilie OPREANA

Estimation of Value-at-Risk on Romanian Stock Exchange Using Volatility Forecasting Models

This paper aims to analyse the market risk (estimated by Value-at-Risk) on the Romanian capital market using modern econometric tools to estimate volatility, such as EWMA, GARCH models. In this respect, I want to identify the most appropriate volatility forecasting model to estimate the Value-at-Risk (VaR) of a portofolio of representative indices (BET, BET-FI and RASDAQ-C). VaR depends on the volatility, time horizon and confidence interval for the continuous returns under analysis. Volatility tends to happen in clusters. The assumption that volatility remains constant at all times can be fatal. It is determined that the most recent data have asserted more influence on future volatility than past data. To emphasize this fact, recently, EWMA and GARCH models have become critical tools in financial applications. The outcome of this study is that GARCH provides more accurate analysis than EWMA.This approach is useful for traders and risk managers to be able to forecast the future volatility on a certain market.
JEL Classification
Full Article
  1. Allen, L., 2004. Understanding market, credit, and operational risk: The Value at Risk Approach, Blackwell Publishing,
  2. Bollerslev, T., 1986. Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics, 31, pp. 307-327.
  3. Bollerslev, T., Chou, R.Y., Kroner, K.F., 1992. ARCH Modeling in Finance: a Review of the Theory and Empirical Evidence. Journal of Econometrics, 52, pp. 5-59.
  4. Butler, C., Mastering Value at Risk, 1999. A step-by-step guide to understanding and applying VaR, Financial Times Pitman Publishing, Market Editions, London, 1999.
  5. Danielsson, J., 2011. Financial Risk ForecastingThe Theory and Practice of Forecasting Market Risk, with Implementation in R and Matlab, WILEY, London,
  6. Engle, R.F., 1982. Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimator of the variance of United Kindom inflation. Econometrica, pp. 987-1008.
  7. Hendricks, D., 1996. Evaluation of Value-at-Risk Models Using Historical Data. Economic Policy Review, pp. 39-69.
  8. Hull, J., & White, A., 1998. Incorporating volatility updating into the historical simulation method for value-at-risk. Journal of Risk, 1(Fall), pp. 5-19,
  9. Jorion, P., 2001. Value at Risk: The New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk, McGraw Hill, Chicago
  10. JP Morgan, 1996. RiskMetricsTM – Technical Document, (see for updated research works).
  11. Manganelli, S., Engle, R.F., 2001. Value at risk models in finance, Working paper series 75, European Central Bank
  12. Mandelbort, B., 1963. The Variation of Certain Speculative Prices, Journal of Business, 36, pp. 394-419.
  13. Nelson, D.B., 199. Conditional heteroskedasticity in asset returns: a new approach. Econometrica, 59, pp.347-370.
  14. Strong, N., 1992. Modeling Abnormal Returns: A Review Article. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 19 (4), pp. 533–553
  15., official site of Bucharest Stock Exchange

Article Rights and License
© 2013 The Author. Published by Sprint Investify. ISSN 2359-7712. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License
Corresponding Author
Claudiu Ilie OPREANA, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
Download PDF


Claudiu Ilie OPREANA
Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania