Monthly Archives: April 2016

The following report provides an update on some of the metrics I use to classify market risk. The word classify is more appropriate as I think that in essence you cannot forecast risk but rather attempt to adjust to it into a timely fashion. Clearly risk would not be a risk if you could forecast it accurately. However as there is generally some degree of persistence in risk regimes, using a dynamic classification may be a useful approach for portfolio rebalancing and hedging. In this report I use the CBOE Brazil ETF Volatility Index (VIX Brazil) as a measure of stock market risk for Brazil . The same methodology can be successfully applied to other inputs. Feel free to contact me at pollux@argonautae.com for more information on the subject.

In my approach I recognise that the nominal level of implied volatility is a crude metric of risk therefore I also use two other measures. The VIX Volga, a measure of uncertainty of risk and the ShockIndex a measure of market dislocation. VIX Volga is simply the volatility of the VIX Brazil over a given period. This measure highlights how uncertain and unstable the level of risk has become. Though positively correlated to the level of the VIX Brazil the VIX Brazil Volga is not necessarily dependent on it. You can have a high level of volga whilst the VIX Brazil is trading at rather innocuous levels. This is not a trivial observation as the leverage undertaken by market participants tends to be an inverse function of market volatility which implies a greater vulnerability when volatility becomes uncertain at low levels and therefore cannot be accurately budgeted fo r. The ShockIndex is the ratio between the Volga and VIX at the beginning the historical window chosen to evaluate the Volga. It quantifies sharp changes and acceleration in risk levels. Historically it has proven to be a good classifying measure for market event risks.

The below charts shows those three measures both relative to a time axis and their historical distribution. The red lines are the 95% confidence intervals, the purple line the median. The blue line highlight the current level. The VIX Volga and ShockIndex in this report are evaluated over a period of 14 days. The medians and 95% confidence intervals are calculated over the full history going back to 1990 though the charts shows only the recent years.

At close of business the 2016-04-12 the VIX Brazil was trading at 57.8 at the 98.3 percentile. The 14-day VIX Brazil Volga was estimated at 24.7 its 83.1 percentile and the Brazil shockindex at 0.5 or its 41.3 percentile.

The above charts are useful, however their visualisation is quite limiting. On the one hand we need quite a few charts to present the data on the other hand it is difficult to show the full VIX history going back to 1990 as this would make the charts unreadable. Therefore clustering and aggregating the whole data into a single chart should be useful to the end user. To answer this I use a mapping technique developed by Kohonen in the 1980′. It uses an unsupervised neural network to re-arrange data around meaningful clusters. Though computationally complex is a practical way to summarise multidimensional data into a low (usually 2) dimensional system.

The below chart shows how the VIX price history was split into 4 distinct clusters. Those clusters where computed not only as a function of the VIX level but also as a function of the other variables, namely VIX volga and Shockindex.

Since 03/2011 the VIX Brazil traded 59 % of the time in Cluster 1, 20 % in Cluster 2, 3 % in Cluster 3 and 17 % in Cluster 4. Overall the layering provided seems quite intuitive as the increase in risk and time spent in each cluster points toward what would generally be expected from market risk regimes ranging from low to high risk.

In the chart below we zoom on the various regimes within which the VIX has been trading for the current year. so far it traded 69 % of the time in Cluster 1, 17 % in Cluster 2, 8 % in Cluster 3 and 6 % in Cluster 4.

Finally the below chart shows a Self Organising Map of the above mentioned risk metrics. The data has been grouped and colored as a function of four clusters of increasing market risk regimes. Obviously as shown on the map, the minimum level of volatility pertains to cluster 1 and the highest to cluster4. The current regime and its progression from 21 days ago is also highlighted on the map.

Always happy to discuss any of the above, feel free to reach me at: pollux@argonautae.com

The following report provides a granular analysis of implied volatilities within G10 FX. I use primarily the same formatting than for my G10FX positioning report to estimate how extended the 1-month FX implied volatilities are over various time horizon.

The first set of charts shows the historical T-stat of the 1-day changes in 1-month implied volatilities over a rolling period of 61-days. This is my statistical metric to quantify how stretched the implied volatilities are, but clearly other time period could be used as shown further down on in that report. The purple line represents the median value since 1996 and the red lines represent the 95% confidence intervals. Therefore if the value is above or below those the deviation of the given implied volatility should be deemed as atypical relative to what would be expected under a normal distribution (I am not saying that implied volatilities have a normal behaviour to be clear….) and therefore overbought/oversold.

The below charts shows the current implied volatilities relative to their historical distributions since 1996. Once again the red lines delimit the 95% confidence intervals and the purple line the median value. The blue line indicates the most current level of 1-month implied volatility.

Finally the below shows a stretch map of the T-Stats to help visualise how much implied volatilities have departed from their equilibrium levels over time horizons ranging from 1-month to 6-month. The bigger the square the most significant the observed upside (Green) or downside (Red) of the implied volatility over the given period.

The following analysis uses a proprietary G10 FX implied volatility index which I created quite a few years ago. The index is a G10 FX 1-month implied volatility index which weights are derived from the BIX FX triennal surveys for the year 2001,2003 & 2007. If you want more information on the exact formulation of the index feel free to contact me pollux@argonautae.com for a chat. For the time being suffice to say that the G10 FX volatility index is a broad and accurately weighted measure of G10 FX risk.

In my approach I recognise that the nominal level of implied volatility is a crude metric of risk therefore I also use two other measures, namely Volga and the ShockIndex. The Volga is simply the volatility of the G10 FX volatility index over a given period. This measure highlights how uncertain and unstable the level of risk in G10 FX has become. Though generally positively correlated those measures of risk can diverge from time to time. You can have a high level of volga whilst G10 FX volatilities are trading at rather innocuous levels. This is not a trivial observation as the leverage undertaken by market participants tends to be an inverse function of market volatility which implies a greater vulnerability when volatility becomes uncertain at low levels and therefore cannot be accurately budgeted for. The ShockIndex is the ratio between the Volga and the G10 FX volatility index at the beginning the historical window chosen to evaluate the Volga. It quantifies sharp changes and acceleration in risk levels. Historically it has proven to be a good classifying measure for market event risks in FX markets.

The below charts shows those three measures both relative to a time axis and their historical distribution. The red lines are the 95% confidence intervals, the purple line the median. The blue line highlight the current level. The Volga and ShockIndex in this report are evaluated over a period of 14 days. The medians and 95% confidence intervals are calculated over the full history going back to 1996 though the charts shows only the recent years.

At close of business the 2016-04-12 the G10 FX volatility index was estimated at 7.8 % at the 54.2 percentile. The 14-day G10 FX Volga was estimated at 4.4 % its 63.3 percentile and the shockindex at 0.5 or its 60.2 percentile.

The above charts are useful, however their visualisation is quite limiting. On the one hand we need quite a few charts to present the data on the other hand it is difficult to show the full G10 FX volatility Index history going back to 1996 as this would make the charts unreadable. Therefore clustering and aggregating the whole data into a single chart should be useful to the end user. To answer this I use a mapping technique developed by Kohonen in the 1980′. It uses an unsupervised neural network to re-arrange data around meaningful clusters. Though computationally complex is a practical way to summarise multidimensional data into a low (usually 2) dimensional system.

The below chart shows how the G10 FX Volatility Index history was split into 4 distinct clusters. Those clusters where computed not only as a function of the G10 FX Volatility Index level but also as a function of the other discussed variables, namely Volga and Shockindex.

Since 1996 the G10 FX volatility Index traded 62 % of the time in Cluster 1, 27 % in Cluster 2, 8 % in Cluster 3 and 3 % in Cluster 4. Overall the layering provided seems quite intuitive as the increase in risk and time spent in each cluster points toward what would generally be expected from market risk regimes ranging from low to high risk.

In the chart below we zoom on the various regimes within which the G10 FX Volatility Index hasevolved for the current year. so far it remained 68 % of the time in Cluster 1, 22 % in Cluster 2, 10 % in Cluster 3 and 0 % in Cluster 4.

Finally the below chart shows a Self Organising Map of the above mentioned risk metrics. The data has been grouped and colored as a function of four clusters of increasing market risk regimes. Obviously as shown on the map, the minimum level of volatility pertains to cluster 1 and the highest to cluster4. The current regime and its progression from 21 days ago is also highlighted on the map.

The following report provides an update on some of the metrics I use to classify market risk. The word classify is more appropriate as I think that in essence you cannot forecast risk but rather attempt to adjust to it into a timely fashion. Clearly risk would not be a risk if you could forecast it accurately. However as there is generally some degree of persistence in risk regimes, using a dynamic classification may be a useful approach for portfolio rebalancing and hedging. In this report I use the CBOE Emerging markets ETF Volatility Index (VIX Emerging markets) as a measure of Emerging stock markets risk. The same methodology can be successfully applied to other inputs. Feel free to contact me at Pierre@argonautae.com for more information on the subject.

In my approach I recognise that the nominal level of implied volatility is a crude metric of risk therefore I also use two other measures. The VIX Volga, a measure of uncertainty of risk and the ShockIndex a measure of market dislocation. VIX Volga is simply the volatility of the VIX Emerging markets over a given period. This measure highlights how uncertain and unstable the level of risk has become. Though positively correlated to the level of the VIX Emerging markets the VIX Emerging markets Volga is not necessarily dependent on it. You can have a high level of volga whilst the VIX Emerging markets is trading at rather innocuous levels. This is not a trivial observation as the leverage undertaken by market participants tends to be an inverse function of market volatility which implies a greater vulnerability when volatility becomes uncertain at low levels and therefore cannot be accurately budgeted fo r. The ShockIndex is the ratio between the Volga and VIX at the beginning the historical window chosen to evaluate the Volga. It quantifies sharp changes and acceleration in risk levels. Historically it has proven to be a good classifying measure for market event risks.

The below charts shows those three measures both relative to a time axis and their historical distribution. The red lines are the 95% confidence intervals, the purple line the median. The blue line highlight the current level. The VIX Volga and ShockIndex in this report are evaluated over a period of 14 days. The medians and 95% confidence intervals are calculated over the full history going back to 1990 though the charts shows only the recent years.

At close of business the 2016-04-12 the VIX Emerging markets was trading at 22.6 at the 43.4 percentile. The 14-day VIX Emerging markets Volga was estimated at 11.5 its 8.2 percentile and the Emerging markets shockindex at 0.5 or its 8.9 percentile.

The above charts are useful, however their visualisation is quite limiting. On the one hand we need quite a few charts to present the data on the other hand it is difficult to show the full VIX history going back to 1990 as this would make the charts unreadable. Therefore clustering and aggregating the whole data into a single chart should be useful to the end user. To answer this I use a mapping technique developed by Kohonen in the 1980′. It uses an unsupervised neural network to re-arrange data around meaningful clusters. Though computationally complex is a practical way to summarise multidimensional data into a low (usually 2) dimensional system.

The below chart shows how the VIX price history was split into 4 distinct clusters. Those clusters where computed not only as a function of the VIX level but also as a function of the other variables, namely VIX volga and Shockindex.

Since 03/2011 the VIX Emerging markets traded 49 % of the time in Cluster 1, 35 % in Cluster 2, 9 % in Cluster 3 and 7 % in Cluster 4. Overall the layering provided seems quite intuitive as the increase in risk and time spent in each cluster points toward what would generally be expected from market risk regimes ranging from low to high risk.

In the chart below we zoom on the various regimes within which the VIX has been trading for the current year. so far it traded 62 % of the time in Cluster 1, 35 % in Cluster 2, 4 % in Cluster 3 and 0 % in Cluster 4.

Finally the below chart shows a Self Organising Map of the above mentioned risk metrics. The data has been grouped and colored as a function of four clusters of increasing market risk regimes. Obviously as shown on the map, the minimum level of volatility pertains to cluster 1 and the highest to cluster4. The current regime and its progression from 21 days ago is also highlighted on the map.

Always happy to discuss any of the above, feel free to reach me at: Pierre@argonautae.co.uk

The following report provides an update on some of the metrics I use to classify market risk. The word classify is more appropriate as I think that in essence you cannot forecast risk but rather attempt to adjust to it into a timely fashion. Clearly risk would not be a risk if you could forecast it accurately. However as there is generally some degree of persistence in risk regimes, using a dynamic classification may be a useful approach for portfolio rebalancing and hedging. In this report I use the CBOE China ETF Volatility Index (VIX China) as a measure of stock market risk for China . The same methodology can be successfully applied to other inputs. Feel free to contact me at Pierre@argonautae.com for more information on the subject.

In my approach I recognise that the nominal level of implied volatility is a crude metric of risk therefore I also use two other measures. The VIX Volga, a measure of uncertainty of risk and the ShockIndex a measure of market dislocation. VIX Volga is simply the volatility of the VIX China over a given period. This measure highlights how uncertain and unstable the level of risk has become. Though positively correlated to the level of the VIX China the VIX China Volga is not necessarily dependent on it. You can have a high level of volga whilst the VIX China is trading at rather innocuous levels. This is not a trivial observation as the leverage undertaken by market participants tends to be an inverse function of market volatility which implies a greater vulnerability when volatility becomes uncertain at low levels and therefore cannot be accurately budgeted fo r. The ShockIndex is the ratio between the Volga and VIX at the beginning the historical window chosen to evaluate the Volga. It quantifies sharp changes and acceleration in risk levels. Historically it has proven to be a good classifying measure for market event risks.

The below charts shows those three measures both relative to a time axis and their historical distribution. The red lines are the 95% confidence intervals, the purple line the median. The blue line highlight the current level. The VIX Volga and ShockIndex in this report are evaluated over a period of 14 days. The medians and 95% confidence intervals are calculated over the full history going back to 1990 though the charts shows only the recent years.

At close of business the 2016-04-11 the VIX China was trading at 28.9 at the 68.7 percentile. The 14-day VIX China Volga was estimated at 10.2 its 19.9 percentile and the China shockindex at 0.3 or its 5.3 percentile.

The above charts are useful, however their visualisation is quite limiting. On the one hand we need quite a few charts to present the data on the other hand it is difficult to show the full VIX history going back to 1990 as this would make the charts unreadable. Therefore clustering and aggregating the whole data into a single chart should be useful to the end user. To answer this I use a mapping technique developed by Kohonen in the 1980′. It uses an unsupervised neural network to re-arrange data around meaningful clusters. Though computationally complex is a practical way to summarise multidimensional data into a low (usually 2) dimensional system.

The below chart shows how the VIX price history was split into 4 distinct clusters. Those clusters where computed not only as a function of the VIX level but also as a function of the other variables, namely VIX volga and Shockindex.

Since 03/2011 the VIX China traded 43 % of the time in Cluster 1, 35 % in Cluster 2, 12 % in Cluster 3 and 10 % in Cluster 4. Overall the layering provided seems quite intuitive as the increase in risk and time spent in each cluster points toward what would generally be expected from market risk regimes ranging from low to high risk.

In the chart below we zoom on the various regimes within which the VIX has been trading for the current year. so far it traded 68 % of the time in Cluster 1, 32 % in Cluster 2, 0 % in Cluster 3 and 0 % in Cluster 4.

Finally the below chart shows a Self Organising Map of the above mentioned risk metrics. The data has been grouped and colored as a function of four clusters of increasing market risk regimes. Obviously as shown on the map, the minimum level of volatility pertains to cluster 1 and the highest to cluster4. The current regime and its progression from 21 days ago is also highlighted on the map.

Always happy to discuss any of the above, feel free to reach me at: Pierre@argonautae.co.uk