Abstract
AbstractThis study employs L‐comoments introduced by Serfling and Xiao (2007) into portfolio Value‐at‐Risk estimation through two models: the Cornish–Fisher expansion (Draper, N. R. & Tierney, D. E., 1973) and modified VaR (Zangari, P., 1996). Backtesting outcomes indicate that modified VaR outperforms and L‐comoments give better estimates of portfolio skewness and excess kurtosis than do classical central moments in modeling heavy‐tailed distributions. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 30:897–908, 2010
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
