For the sake of the argument, let's just take two risky assets in the portfolio.
Given that correlation between returns on those 2 risky assets decreased, (rho1,2), VaR should naturally decrease because the risk (volatility of portfolio) has just been decreased. However, an interview question asked me in what situation/portfolio can the VaR actually increase??? I'm all confused
| +178 | Americas M&A League Table Q2 Updated | 74 | 29m |
| +132 | New Article: Dramatic Slide as UBS #22 (US) & New Leadership Desperately Needed | 27 | 17m |
| +109 | Restructuring: Anti-climactic Experience | 29 | 29m |
| +80 | IB Net Worth / Savings Check | 31 | 40m |
| +74 | A COMPLETE GUIDE TO SUMMER INTERNSHIP RECRUITING | 12 | 1d |
| +51 | Boutique firm wants access to my LinkedIn? | 40 | 1d |
| +39 | Investment Banking is Hard | 17 | 21h |
| +31 | PWP vs BofA | 23 | 3h |
| +25 | Who pays the highest right now? | 14 | 3h |
| +21 | Big 4 Transaction diligence (FDD) vs Valuations and modeling for goal to get in IB | 5 | 4d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
One of the assets could have gotten riskier while the other stays the same. Consider a portfolio of two assets. One returns 5, 10 or 15, and the other returns 10, 20 or 30. Currently correlation=1 and VaR=0. Now let the first asset still return 5, 10, or 15, but now the second asset returns 0,-19.3, or-12. Correlation is now -.62 and VaR has increased.
A simpler example of this is a perfectly hedged portfolio of two assets. Say correlation=1 and the gains from the first asset will always perfectly offset losses from the second and vice versa, so VaR=0. If the correlation decreases there will now be some probability of a loss so VaR>0.
You are correct
Thanks for the input mrme335! I get the idea that if correlation decreases, then the SD of portfolio decreases as well, and hence VaR increases given the VaR formula: VaR=-(mu+1.65*SDportfolio) for 95% CI. However, I'm confused at why does VaR=0 if correlation=1?
VaR is 0 in the correlation = -1 or 1 sense because you can just buy/sell the proper ratio to offset all gains and losses.
For example if you know with certainty, which you do because correlation=1 or -1, that whenever asset A increases in price by $1 asset B decreases in price by $3, then you could buy 3 of A and 1 of B. In this portfolio no matter what happens you will make, and lose no money, hence VaR = 0. The downside is obviously that you can't make money either.
Voluptatum dolorem et recusandae est ex. Non iste qui ducimus soluta.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...