Skip to content
All library documents

Estimating Long-Run Default Rates for Changing Portfolios

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Richi Wa

Summary

The document considers how to estimate a Basel long-run average default rate when exposures enter and leave a portfolio during the year. It describes a simple estimator: at each year end, count the exposures still active, measure defaults among them over the following year, calculate that year’s default rate, and average the annual rates. The post notes that these observation windows do not overlap, but this approach may omit short-lived exposures and defaults that occur between year-end snapshots.

A response proposes a parametric simulation: define a universe of feasible positions, model their default behavior, simulate portfolio churn and defaults over successive periods, and average results across repeated trials. Under equal default probabilities, the response expects churn not to change the expected long-run rate, though it may increase estimator variance. It also acknowledges that the model depends on calibrated assumptions and may miss real portfolio features. Neither this proposal nor the question establishes a Basel-compliant market practice; the proposed simulation is exploratory, and a nonparametric alternative is left unresolved.

Key ideas

  • Averaging annual default rates based on year-end exposures can miss short-lived positions and defaults between snapshots.
  • The response proposes simulating defaults and portfolio entries and exits over repeated periods.
  • With equal default probabilities, the response expects churn to affect estimator variance rather than the expected long-run rate.
  • A parametric simulation requires calibration and may fail to capture important features of the real portfolio.
  • The document does not establish that the suggested method meets Basel requirements or describe a nonparametric alternative.

Tags

Full text
# Calculating the long run average default rate when the portfolio changes during the year


# Calculating the long run average default rate when the portfolio changes during the year












The Basel rules prescribe to calculate a long run average default rate (LADR). It is stated that his rate should be calculated as the average of yearly default rates.

A first idea what be:

- look at the number of living exposures at each year end $t$ - say $L_t$

- count the number of defaults among $L_t$ from $t$ to $t+1$ - say $D_t$

- calculte $d_t = D_t/L_t$

- calculate the average $\hat{D} = \frac1n \sum_{i=1}^n d_t$

The above estimator $\hat{D}$ has nice properties as the $d_t$ do not overlap.

But ... In practice if we think of accounts or exposures that only exist for a short period of time (sometimes much less than a year) it can happen that the portfolio fluctuates significantly during a given year. In the above we miss all those living exposures and probably defaults too.

What is market practice to calculate Basel-compliant LADRs that take into account fluctuating portfolios?

## Answer by Attack68 (score 1)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/40896

I don't know the answer to this and am responding purely out of interest and idea sharing, since I like the question.

Could this work as a Parametric intensive computational statistical approach;

1) Define a universe of positions the portfolio can feasibly hold, and model each with some assumption about default over a given time period (statically at first for simplicity).

2) Initially create your portfolio with a random allocation of a subset of feasible positions (all same notional for simplicity).

3) Randomly simulate some defaults within your feasible space and record those held in your portfolio.

4) Parametrise the 'churn' of your portfolio since this characterises its fluctuation; after each period choose $N$ closed positions and $M$ new positions where $N$, $M$ are your parametrised random variables and then randomly select those numbers of closed and new positions from the relevant sets. (choose from distributions that average a constant size portfolio)

5) Repeat 3) and continue until enough periods have been measured to return a default rate over the complete period.

6) Perform enough experiments to take an expectation of the long term default rate.

Under this procedure, if the rate of default on every position was the same, I expect that mathematically the churn parameter will do nothing to the expectation of the long term default rate. It will however increase the variance of the estimator since for each trail the number of holdings can increase significantly or reduce significantly and this will impact the final result.

I recognise a strong critcism of this model is that it is parametric and will likely miscapture some facets, and of course requires calibration. The problem with your approach, although, non-parametric is that it assumes the position is held for a period of time that it may indeed not be. I'll have a think about how one might go about a non-parametric bootstrap procedure, to account for this.

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.