|
EconStor >
Deutsche Bundesbank, Forschungszentrum, Frankfurt am Main >
Discussion Paper Series 2: Banking and Financial Studies, Deutsche Bundesbank >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/45639
|
| | |
| Title: | | Does modeling framework matter? A comparative study of structural and reduced-form models  |
| Authors: | | Gündüz, Yalin Uhrig-Homburg, Marliese |
| Issue Date: | | 2011 |
| Series/Report no.: | | Discussion Paper Series 2: Banking and Financial Studies 2011,05 |
| Abstract: | | This study provides a rigorous empirical comparison of structural and reduced-form credit risk frameworks. As major difference we focus on the discriminative modeling of default time. In contrast to previous literature, we calibrate both approaches to bond and equity prices. By using same input data, applying comparable estimation techniques, and assessing the out-of-sample prediction quality on same time series of CDS prices we are able to judge whether empirically the model structure itself makes an important difference. Interestingly, the models' prediction power is quite close on average. Still, the reduced-form approach outperforms the structural for investment-grade names and longer maturities. |
| Subjects: | | credit risk structural models reduced-form models default intensity stationary leverage credit default swaps |
| JEL: | | G13 |
| ISBN: | | 978-3-86558-701-5 |
| Document Type: | | Working Paper |
| Appears in Collections: | | Discussion Paper Series 2: Banking and Financial Studies, Deutsche Bundesbank
|
| |
| | |
Download bibliographical data as:
BibTeX
|
| |
Share on:http://hdl.handle.net/10419/45639
|
Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|