point

 

 Remember me

Register  |   Lost password?

 

Our popular course Introduction to QuantLib Development will be taking place June 18-20th, 2018.

 

arXiv logo for blog page


Behavioural effects on XVA. (arXiv:1803.03477v1 [q-fin.PR])

Sun, 11 Mar 2018 19:43:55 GMT

Bank behaviour is important for pricing XVA because it links different
counterparties and thus breaks the usual XVA pricing assumption of counterparty
independence. Consider a typical case of a bank hedging a client trade via a
CCP. On client default the hedge (effects) will be removed (rebalanced). On the
other hand, if the hedge counterparty defaults the hedge will be replaced. Thus
if the hedge required initial margin then the default probability driving MVA
is from the client not from the hedge counterparty. This is the opposite of
usual assumptions where counterparty XVAs are computed independent of each
other. Replacement of the hedge counterparty means multiple CVA costs on the
hedge side need inclusion. Since hedge trades are generally at riskless mid (or
worse) these costs are paid on the client side, and must be calculated before
the replacement hedge counterparties are known. We call these counterparties
anonymous counterparties. The effects on CVA and MVA will generally be
exclusive because MVA largely removes CVA, and CVA is hardly relevant for CCPs.
Effects on KVA and FVA will resemble those on MVA. We provide a theoretical
framework, including anonymous counterparties, and numerical examples. Pricing
XVA by considering counterparties in isolation is inadequate and behaviour must
be taken into account.