Variance Decomposition Networks : Potential Pitfalls and a Simple Solution /

Diebold and Yilmaz (2015) recently introduced variance decomposition networks as tools for quantifying and ranking the systemic risk of individual firms. The nature of these networks and their implied rankings depend on the choice decomposition method. The standard choice is the order invariant gene...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Chan-Lau, Jorge
Formato: Revista
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Washington, D.C. : International Monetary Fund, 2017.
Colección:IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ; No. 2017/107
Acceso en línea:Full text available on IMF
LEADER 02109cas a2200241 a 4500
001 AALejournalIMF017622
008 230101c9999 xx r poo 0 0eng d
020 |c 5.00 USD 
020 |z 9781475598407 
022 |a 1018-5941 
040 |a BD-DhAAL  |c BD-DhAAL 
100 1 |a Chan-Lau, Jorge. 
245 1 0 |a Variance Decomposition Networks :   |b Potential Pitfalls and a Simple Solution /  |c Jorge Chan-Lau. 
264 1 |a Washington, D.C. :  |b International Monetary Fund,  |c 2017. 
300 |a 1 online resource (48 pages) 
490 1 |a IMF Working Papers 
500 |a <strong>Off-Campus Access:</strong> No User ID or Password Required 
500 |a <strong>On-Campus Access:</strong> No User ID or Password Required 
506 |a Electronic access restricted to authorized BRAC University faculty, staff and students 
520 3 |a Diebold and Yilmaz (2015) recently introduced variance decomposition networks as tools for quantifying and ranking the systemic risk of individual firms. The nature of these networks and their implied rankings depend on the choice decomposition method. The standard choice is the order invariant generalized forecast error variance decomposition of Pesaran and Shin (1998). The shares of the forecast error variation, however, do not add to unity, making difficult to compare risk ratings and risks contributions at two different points in time. As a solution, this paper suggests using the Lanne-Nyberg (2016) decomposition, which shares the order invariance property. To illustrate the differences between both decomposition methods, I analyzed the global financial system during 2001 - 2016. The analysis shows that different decomposition methods yield substantially different systemic risk and vulnerability rankings. This suggests caution is warranted when using rankings and risk contributions for guiding financial regulation and economic policy. 
538 |a Mode of access: Internet 
830 0 |a IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ;  |v No. 2017/107 
856 4 0 |z Full text available on IMF  |u http://elibrary.imf.org/view/journals/001/2017/107/001.2017.issue-107-en.xml  |z IMF e-Library