1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory London Business School Management Science and Operations Dynamic Risk Management of Electricity.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Value-at-Risk: A Risk Estimating Tool for Management
Advertisements

Chapter 12: Basic option theory
1 Complete Markets. 2 Definitions Event State of the world State Contingent Claim (State Claim)  Payoff Vector  Market is a payoff vector Exchange dollars.
Valuation of Financial Options Ahmad Alanani Canadian Undergraduate Mathematics Conference 2005.
Scenario Optimization. Financial Optimization and Risk Management Professor Alexei A. Gaivoronski Contents Introduction Mean absolute deviation models.
1 Dynamic portfolio optimization with stochastic programming TIØ4317, H2009.
Advanced Risk Management I Lecture 7. Example In applications one typically takes one year of data and a 1% confidence interval If we assume to count.
Chapter 21 Value at Risk Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 8th Edition, Copyright © John C. Hull 2012.
TK 6413 / TK 5413 : ISLAMIC RISK MANAGEMENT TOPIC 6A: VALUE AT RISK (VaR) (EXTENSION) 1.
Chapter 21 Value at Risk Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 8th Edition, Copyright © John C. Hull 2012.
Optimization in Financial Engineering Yuriy Zinchenko Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of Calgary December 02, 2009.
Pricing and capital allocation for unit-linked life insurance contracts with minimum death guarantee C. Frantz, X. Chenut and J.F. Walhin Secura Belgian.
RISK VALUATION. Risk can be valued using : Derivatives Valuation –Using valuation method –Value the gain Risk Management Valuation –Using statistical.
An Introduction to the Market Price of Interest Rate Risk Kevin C. Ahlgrim, ASA, MAAA, PhD Illinois State University Actuarial Science & Financial Mathematics.
Bert Willems Cournot Competition, Financial Option Markets and Efficiency.
Efficient Portfolios MGT 4850 Spring 2008 University of Lethbridge.
L9: Consumption, Saving, and Investments 1 Lecture 9: Consumption, Saving, and Investments The following topics will be covered: –Consumption and Saving.
Farm Management Chapter 15 Managing Risk and Uncertainty.
Chapter 6 The VAR Approach: CreditMetrics and Other Models.
Value at Risk (VAR) VAR is the maximum loss over a target
Oum, Oren and Deng, March 24, Hedging Quantity Risks with Standard Power Options in a Competitive Electricity Market Yumi Oum, University of California.
Risk Minimizing Portfolio Optimization and Hedging with Conditional Value-at-Risk Jing Li Mingxin Xu Department of Mathematics and Statistics University.
Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives 6 th Edition, Copyright © John C. Hull Chapter 18 Value at Risk.
Polyhedral Risk Measures Vadym Omelchenko, Institute of Information Theory and Automation, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.
© Mcgraw-Hill Companies, 2008 Farm Management Chapter 15 Managing Risk and Uncertainty.
Supply Contract Allocation Gyana R. Parija Bala Ramachandran IBM T.J. Watson Research Center INFORMS Miami 2001.
Alternative Measures of Risk. The Optimal Risk Measure Desirable Properties for Risk Measure A risk measure maps the whole distribution of one dollar.
Prof. H.-J. Lüthi WS Budapest , 1 Hedging strategy and operational flexibility in the electricity market Characteristics of the electricity.
Corporate Banking and Investment Risk tolerance and optimal portfolio choice Marek Musiela, BNP Paribas, London.
LECTURE 22 VAR 1. Methods of calculating VAR (Cont.) Correlation method is conceptually simple and easy to apply; it only requires the mean returns and.
EPOC Winter Workshop 2010 Anthony Downward, David Young, Golbon Zakeri.
1 Chapter 11 Hedging, Insuring, Diversifying. 2 Contents 1. Forward and Futures to Hedge Risk 2. Swap Contracts 3. Hedging, Matching Assets to Liabilities.
HEDGING STRATEGIES. WHAT IS HEDGING? Hedging is a mechanism to reduce price risk Derivatives are widely used for hedging Its main purpose is to reduce.
Portfolio Management Unit – 1 Session No.4 Topic: Investment Objectives Unit – 1 Session No.4 Topic: Investment Objectives.
@ A.C.F. Vorst - Rotterdam 1 Optimal Risk Taking under VaR Restrictions Ton Vorst Erasmus Center for Financial Research January 2000 Paris, Lunteren, Odense,
1 Translation invariant and positive homogeneous risk measures and portfolio management Zinoviy Landsman Department of Statistics, University of Haifa,
Fundamentals of Futures and Options Markets, 5 th Edition, Copyright © John C. Hull Value at Risk Chapter 18.
The Council’s Approach to Economic Risk Michael Schilmoeller Northwest Power and Conservation Council for the Resource Adequacy Technical Committee September.
Value at Risk Chapter 16. The Question Being Asked in VaR “What loss level is such that we are X % confident it will not be exceeded in N business days?”
Estimating Credit Exposure and Economic Capital Using Monte Carlo Simulation Ronald Lagnado Vice President, MKIRisk IPAM Conference on Financial Mathematics.
1 A non-Parametric Measure of Expected Shortfall (ES) By Kostas Giannopoulos UAE University.
Chapter McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Risk and Capital Budgeting 13.
Real Options Chapter 8 A 4-Step Process for Valuing Real Options.
Measuring Risk Risk Management Prof. Ali Nejadmalayeri, Dr N a.k.a. “Dr N”
1 Complete Markets. 2 Definitions Event State of the world State Contingent Claim (State Claim)  Payoff Vector  Market is a payoff vector Exchange dollars.
Investment Performance Measurement, Risk Tolerance and Optimal Portfolio Choice Marek Musiela, BNP Paribas, London.
Pricing insurance contracts: an incomplete market approach ACFI seminar, 2 November 2006 Antoon Pelsser University of Amsterdam & ING Group.
CIA Annual Meeting LOOKING BACK…focused on the future.
 Measures the potential loss in value of a risky asset or portfolio over a defined period for a given confidence interval  For example: ◦ If the VaR.
RISK AND REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES Calculate and interpret the basic measures of risk for individual assets and portfolios of assets.
Value at Risk Chapter 20 Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 7th International Edition, Copyright © John C. Hull 2008.
Lotter Actuarial Partners 1 Pricing and Managing Derivative Risk Risk Measurement and Modeling Howard Zail, Partner AVW
The Black-Scholes-Merton Model Chapter B-S-M model is used to determine the option price of any underlying stock. They believed that stock follow.
How to Build an Investment Portfolio The Determinants of Portfolio Choice The determinants of portfolio choice, sometimes referred to as determinants of.
Dynamic asset and liability management. Financial Optimization and Risk Management Professor Alexei A. Gaivoronski Asset and Liability Management (ALM)
Enterprise Risk Management An Introduction Frank Reynolds, Reynolds, Thorvardson, Ltd.
Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 5th edition © 2002 by John C. Hull 16.1 Value at Risk Chapter 16.
Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 4th edition © 1999 by John C. Hull 14.1 Value at Risk Chapter 14.
1 CHAPTER THREE: Portfolio Theory, Fund Separation and CAPM.
Alexei A.Gaivoronski January 2006 TIØ4137 Financial Optimization 1 Financial Optimization and Risk Management Professor Alexei A. Gaivoronski Department.
5-1 “Modern” Finance? u “Modern Finance Theory” has many components: u Sharpe’s “Capital Asset Pricing Model” (CAPM) u Modigliani-Miller’s “Dividend Irrelevance.
Properties and Computation of CoVaR efficient portfolio Shin, Dong Wook SOLAB Industrial and System Engineering Department, KAIST
March-14 Central Bank of Egypt 1 Strategic Asset Allocation.
March-14 Central Bank of Egypt 1 Risk Measurement.
CARe Seminar on Reinsurance Marriott Inner Harbor, Baltimore, MD
Market-Risk Measurement
Decisions Under Risk and Uncertainty
CHAPTER 6 RISK The Concept of Variability E(R) = Sum of (oi x pi ),
TOPIC 3.1 CAPITAL MARKET THEORY
VaR Introduction I: Parametric VaR Tom Mills FinPricing
Presentation transcript:

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory London Business School Management Science and Operations Dynamic Risk Management of Electricity Contracts with Contingent Portfolio Programming Janne Kettunen, Ahti Salo, and Derek Bunn Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Management Science and Operations London Business School

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 2 London Business School Management Science and Operations Background and Motivation n Electricity market deregulation has increased competition and uncertainties n Uniqueness of electricity market (Bunn, 2004) –Non-storable, stakeholders bear price and load risk –Correlation between price and load (exponentially increasing in load) –Mean reversion –Spikes and seasonal variations –Volatility clustering –High and volatile risk premiums in futures n How should an electricity generator or distributor hedge its risks using futures? n Requirements on model formulation –Correlation, arbitrage free, mean reversions, volatility clustering  scenario tree (Ho, et. al., 1995) –Risk management  Conditional Cash Flow at Risk and risk constraint matrix (Kettunen and Salo, 2006) –Path dependencies  Contingent Portfolio Programming (Gustafsson and Salo, 2005

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 3 London Business School Management Science and Operations Scenario Tree with Two Example Paths Highlighted Time 012 Ho, Stapleton, Subrahmanyam (1995), Peterson Stapleton (2002) s p = spot price s l = load

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 4 London Business School Management Science and Operations VAR Maximum Loss CVAR Portfolio loss Probability Probability 1-β f(x,y) = loss function y = uncertainty p(y) = probability density function β = confidence level x = portfolio decision strategy  = threshold value (=VAR) (Rockafeller and Uryasev, 2000) Conditional Value-At-Risk

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 5 London Business School Management Science and Operations n CCFAR can be derived from CVAR –A discrete CVAR –Portfolio loss framed using cash position beyond the threshold level s.t. Definitions Conditional-Cash-Flow-At-Risk (CCFAR) Computation (Kettunen and Salo, 2006)

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 6 London Business School Management Science and Operations Electricity Contract Portfolio Optimization Risk management constraints for conditional cash flow at risk (CCFAR) … cash position and trading constraints such that, Maximize expected terminal cash position

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 7 London Business School Management Science and Operations n Electricity distributor: uncertain load and price and can use futures to hedge risks n Price data (€/MWh) from Nordpool and futures seen on n Load data (GWh) from Finnish Energy Industries (used 1% of actual) –Conditional volatilities (fitting GARCH(1,1) for filtered data) –Premiums (fitting linear equation) –Mean reversions c P =0.2 and c L =0.4 (fitting linear equation) –Correlation: N=0.08 and λ=0.1 (fitting linearized version of ) –Risk free interest rate 2% –Trade fee 0,03€/MWh Computational Experiments

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 8 London Business School Management Science and Operations Comparison of Contingent Optimization, Periodic Optimization and Fixed Allocation Methods 5,6% cost reduction Figures in million euros

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 9 London Business School Management Science and Operations Uncertainty in Premium and Correlation Risk averse player Competitive player Figures in million euros

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 10 London Business School Management Science and Operations Uncertainty in Premium and Correlation No correlation vs. correlation Risk averse player Competitive player Figures in million euros

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 11 London Business School Management Science and Operations Uncertainty in Mean Reversion and Volatility of Load Risk averse player Competitive player Figures in million euros

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 12 London Business School Management Science and Operations Uncertainty in Mean Reversion and Volatility of Spot Price Risk averse player Competitive player Figures in million euros

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 13 London Business School Management Science and Operations Expected Cost with 6 Weeks and 4 Weeks 95% CCFAR Constraints Competitive player Risk averse player B CCFAR 6wks,95% <€0.6M Figures in million euros

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 14 London Business School Management Science and Operations n Model –Correlation important to include –Optimal strategies robust (remain close to efficient frontiers) –Contingent optimization consistently more efficient than periodic optimization or fixed allocation methods n Risk management perspective –Competitive player: most concern about price related uncertainties –Risk averse player: most concern about premiums –Both players bear load related risk (swing-option contracts) Conclusions 1/2

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 15 London Business School Management Science and Operations n Standard risk management intuitions supported –Increase in volatilities increase risks –Decrease in mean reversions increase risks –Increase in premiums increase cost n Risk constraint matrix for concurrent time periods and confidence levels –Re-run model when new information arrives (rolling horizon) –Regulatory requirements –Financially tight situation Conclusions 2/2

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 16 London Business School Management Science and Operations n Applications –Optimal hedging strategies –Price non-market tradable contracts n Own production possible to incorporate (futures at the production cost) n Develop model for other stakeholders in energy market, natural resources, or financial contracts n Include market power related phenomena (dynamic scenario tree) Current and Future Work

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 17 London Business School Management Science and Operations Thank You – Questions?

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 18 London Business School Management Science and Operations References »Bunn, D. W Modelling Prices in Competitive Electricity Markets. Wiley, London. »Doege, J., H.-J. Lüthi, P. Schiltknecht Risk management of power portfolios and valuation of flexibility. OR Sectrum »Gustafsson, J., A. Salo Contingent portfolio programming for the management of risky projects. Operations Research 53(6) »Kettunen, J. A. Salo Dynamic Risk Management in Contingent Portfolio Programming. Submitted. »Kettunen, J. A. Salo. D. Bunn Dynamic risk management of electricity contracts with contingent portfolio programming. Manuscript. »Peterson, S. J., R. C. Stapleton The pricing of bermudan-style options on correlated assets. Review of Derivatives Research »Rockafeller, R. T., S. Uryasev Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. The Journal of Risk 2(3) »Eichhorn, A., W. Römisch, I. Wegner Polyhedral risk measures in electricity portfolio optimization. PAMM Proc. Appl. Math. Mech. Minisymposium MA1 4(1) Available at www3.interscience.wiley.com/.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 19 London Business School Management Science and Operations Scenario Tree 1/3 Expected spot prices derived from market observed futures Upward and downward movement amounts for spot price and load Nodal values for spot price and load Following Ho, Stapleton, Subrahmanyam (1995) and its extension Following Ho, Stapleton, Subrahmanyam (1995) and its extension Peterson Stapleton (2002)

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 20 London Business School Management Science and Operations Scenario Tree 2/3 Conditional upward moving probabilities of spot price and load Correlation (exponentially increasing in load)

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 21 London Business School Management Science and Operations Scenario Tree 3/3 Scenario specific unconditional probability Scenario specific future price

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 22 London Business School Management Science and Operations Use Asset ReturnsUse Cash Flows Measures maximum loss with certain confidence level VAR (U.S. SEC ~1980) CFAR (Linsmeier and Pearson 2000) Measures expected loss with certain confidence level conditional tail event occurred CVAR (Rockafeller and Uryasev 2000 and Artzner et. al. 1999) CCFAR (Kettunen and Salo 2006) Value-at-Risk Approaches

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 23 London Business School Management Science and Operations CVAR - a Coherent Risk Measure n X and Y are random returns –Translation invariance: –Subadditivity: –Positive homogeneity : –Positivity:

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 24 London Business School Management Science and Operations n CCFAR can be derived from CVAR (Uryasev 2000, and Artzner et. al. 1999) –A discrete CVAR –Portfolio loss framed using cash position beyond the threshold level s.t. Definitions Conditional-Cash-Flow-At-Risk (CCFAR) Computation (Kettunen and Salo 2006)

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 25 London Business School Management Science and Operations = risk tolerances at different time periods and confidence levels = Risk Constraint Matrix = risk measurements with a given measure (e.g., CCFAR ) Definitions n Rationale –Compact presentation of risk requirements –Allows for dynamic risk management of  different time periods  different percentiles –Risk mgmt using complementary risk measures Risk Contraint Matrix (RCM)

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 26 London Business School Management Science and Operations Cash position constraints Electricity Contract Portfolio Optimization with All Constraints Risk management constraints s.t., Trading constraints

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 27 London Business School Management Science and Operations Computational Experiments n Compare performance of contingent optimization to periodic optimization and fixed allocation methods n Analyze effects of increased uncertainty, two perspectives –competitive player –risk averse player n Robustness of suggested strategies n Concurrent risk constraints