Skip to content
All library documents

Currency Pair Volatility Depends on Both Currencies and Their Correlation

Article Quant Q&A · Author: elemolotiv

Summary

The document explains why currency pairs can have different volatility by treating an exchange rate as relative exposure to two currencies. A pair’s risk cannot be attributed to either currency in isolation from that pair alone. Comparing a third currency cross can help infer the relative movement: for example, GBP/JPY, USD/JPY, and GBP/USD together provide information about the component currency risks and their relationships. More generally, pair volatility depends on both currencies’ volatility and their correlation, much as portfolio risk depends on component risks and covariances.

The answers also identify sources of currency-specific risk, including policy choices, central bank intervention, growth and inflation expectations, interest-rate differentials, and broader market exposures. One response cautions that historical volatility does not guarantee future volatility and questions the unspecified calculation behind a displayed comparison; it offers implied-volatility figures as a separate check. The discussion is conceptual and does not give a fitted decomposition or forecasting method. Extending the analysis across many currencies raises computational complexity, and the assumptions used to infer individual currency risks matter.

Key ideas

  • An exchange-rate pair reflects the relative movement of two currencies.
  • Pair volatility depends on both component volatilities and their correlation.
  • A third currency cross can help infer the relationships among the currencies in a pair.
  • Policy, economic conditions, intervention, and market exposures can affect currency risk.
  • Historical volatility is not a reliable guarantee of future volatility.

Tags

Full text
# Why are some currency pairs more volatile than others?


# Why are some currency pairs more volatile than others?












Why for example GBP/JPY is twice volatile as USD/JPY ? ... and many more cases involving other major forex pairs here: full list.

thanks in advance!

## Answer by demully (score 5, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50877

OK, think of this like you were picking between stocks... but you could only pick one stock to buy by picking a stock to sell.

You pick two miners, BHP and Rio. Both have massive iron ore exposure, so both are very volatile against anything else. Let's call this risk "AUD" for argument's sake ;-) But against each other, they tend to move in tandem, with little relative volatility. Looking between the two, you know that BHP also has energy exposure that Rio does not. So the BHP/Rio ratio tends to correlate with Exxon and Shell. Let's call this phenomenon "AUDNOK" or "AUDCAD" for argument's sake ;-)

The key problem in FX is that you are always dealing with two currencies. Obvious and trivial, but nevertheless important. One can never seperate out, let alone measure, the risk in two currencies XXXYYY, given only XXX and YYY.

But you can, given a third currency ZZZ (and thus XXXZZZ and YYYZZZ). Just like a 3-stock portfolio, the volatility of XXXYYY will become a function of the volatity of XXX, that of YYY, and the correlation between both and ZZZ. This is no different from the portfolio risk of eg buying Apple and Gold ;-)

Add in additional currencies (AAA, BBB etc.) and there will exist (complicated) algos to define the precise risk parameters of any single currency in your sample set. But the complexity of the task scales exponentially with the number of currencies chosen ;-(

So in your case, it's usual just to look at GBPJPY and USDJPY; and thus also GBPUSD. Assuming an independent "pound-ness", "yen-ness" and "dollar-ness", the volatility of each and the inter-correlation with each other can be deduced.

All of which allows an internally consistent FX system that prevents arbitrage. That's a critical but dull^2 observation. Which is important, because anything else fails any basic integrity test.

## Answer by Yugmorf (score 2)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50777

Because of differing underlying factor risks. These might include such things as policy risk (eg. tax, capital controls), central bank intervention risk (eg. a currency peg at one extreme), economic factors (eg. sensitivity to outlook for GDP growth and inflation), and financial market risk dependencies (eg. interest rate differentials, equity market risk).

## Answer by gregV (score 1)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/50909

This link posted appears to show historical vol which is never an accurate indication of future volatility assuming the stochastic (random) process. There is also no info at how they calculate what they output.

However, it's highly unlikely that GBPJPY is twice as volatile as USDJPY. To test, i put 2 ATM 3M FX options into Bloomberg calculator and indicated 3M implied vol is ~ 7% for GBPJPY and ~5% for USDJPY.

Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.