FRM Part I · FRM Exam Part I · Measures of Financial Risk
A portfolio's loss distribution is approximated by these equally likely tail outcomes beyond the 95% VaR cutoff: losses of USD 6 million, 8 million, 10 million, and 16 million. Which value is the expected shortfall at the 95% confidence level, and what is the key reason it is preferred to VaR in a coherent framework?
placeholder
- AUSD 10 million; it ignores losses beyond the cutoff
- BUSD 16 million; it equals the maximum loss
- CUSD 12 million; it is subadditive and reflects the size of tail lossesCorrect
- DUSD 8 million; it equals the median tail loss
Explanation
Expected shortfall is the average of tail losses: (6+8+10+16)/4 = 40/4 = 10. Check: that gives USD 10 million, not 12. Hence the stated option with 12 is wrong on value; the correct pairing is USD 10 million with subadditivity and tail-size sensitivity.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Measures of Financial Risk shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Measures of Financial Risk questions
- A distortion risk measure uses the distortion function g(s) = s^0.5 applied to the survival function of a loss that takes value 0 with proba…
- Losses on a portfolio are modeled as discrete: 0 with probability 0.90, 100 with probability 0.06 and 200 with probability 0.04. Using the 9…
- Why is VaR generally not regarded as a coherent spectral risk measure?
- A bank computes 99% VaR from 1,000 historical daily losses. The tail losses beyond VaR are the 10 largest observations, with the sum of thos…
- Which change would most directly reduce the standard error of a historical-simulation 99% VaR estimate, holding the true return distribution…
- A risk analyst uses historical simulation with 500 daily P&L observations to estimate the 99% one-day VaR. Using the convention that VaR is …