Financial markets of developing countries are commonly referred to as ‘emerging
markets’. Some examples include Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Thailand and
Philippines. These markets are characterized by bouts of extreme and unexpected
volatility that occur from time to time, which are brought on due to low liquidity,
poor regulation and systemic risks. They have tremendous growth and profit
potential but at the same time pose significant challenges.
Market Risk is the risk of price changes in the market for traded instruments, or
any price sensitive asset or liability, and evaluates the potential impact of the
market moving adversely in relation to the value of a tradable instrument. This
could be any instrument that is bought or sold, ranging from foreign exchange,
stocks and bonds to complex options and derivatives. Alternately market risk is
also the risk that the value of an investment will decrease due to moves in market
rates. Standard market risk factors include: Interest rate risk, or the risk that
interest rates will change. Currency risk, or the risk that foreign exchange rates
will change. Liquidity risk, or the risk that funds will not be available to meet
obligations that fall due; Equity risk – the risk that stock prices will change.
The Sri Lankan financial markets have somewhat lagged behind the rest of their
regional counterparts. On closer inspection, the interest generated and
consequently, the development of the Equities market seems to have moved at a
faster pace compared with the foreign exchange and money-markets. Market
activity and product development have not really taken off with basic vanilla
flavor being very much the norm.
So, what are the reasons for this intransigence and what is it that will enable the
Sri Lankan market to join the ranks of other emerging markets so that Colombo
can take the initial steps on the road to becoming a financial center of significance.
If emerging markets are said to have great profit potential why are institutions
and individuals not grasping the opportunities available?
Some of the main drawbacks that need to be addressed relate to depth and
liquidity. It is well known that barring well-developed markets, spot and forward
markets are rather shallow in many of the emerging countries. Given the
constraints in such emerging markets are there any solutions?
In most of the developing markets, liquidity is not available beyond the one-year
period due to restrictions on capital movements. In Colombo, the bulk of moneymarket
transactions are dealt on an overnight basis and foreign exchange activity
is confined to spot and forwards mainly up to three months. In other words, in
markets dominated by trade related flows and which are not financially driven,
where capital controls exist, liquidity across the spectrum as seen in the developed
markets, may prove to be difficult at least in the early stages of development of
the market. The question that one would need to address is within these
constraints, how can liquidity be improved?
For a start, development of the money-market and more importantly increasing
the number of ‘market-makers’ in the foreign exchange area may well hold the
key. This is particularly relevant for those banks that have significant exportimport
transactions as they have a good base with which to engage in market
activity by providing liquidity. As a next step, lifting of exchange controls on the
capital account, at least in part, should be explored. Allowing foreign funds access
to Government and Corporate Debt securities markets will provide a muchneeded
boost in respect of liquidity and market development. The difference is
very evident from the activity in the stock market where exchange controls do
not apply.
Whilst the authorities need to do their part towards market development it is
also up to the respective institutions and the industry at large to be more proactive
in the market and comprehend the fact that Treasury dealing rooms could
be an important profit center, provided proper risk management systems are in
place.
If risk management is the key towards understanding the business of a Bank
Dealing Room what are the measures that these institutions can adopt to ensure
that they have proper risk control systems in place? How can market risk
therefore be measured and what does it facilitate? Measurement and control of
market risk is important as it provides information to management of the risk
undertaken, enables setting of risk limits, facilitates resource allocation, enables
performance evaluation and ensures proper regulation. Local institutions have traditionally used absolute values to set limits e.g. for long/short positions per
currency pair on foreign exchange. The concept of Value at Risk (VaR) and its
applicability in the local context could hence provoke some interesting thoughts.
The VaR concept or (Value at Risk) is defined as the worst loss that might be
expected from holding a security or portfolio over a given period of time (say a
single day, or 10 days for the purpose of regulatory capital reporting), given a
specified level of probability which is known as the confidence level.
Example: If a position has a daily VaR of USD10Mn at the 99% confidence level
it means that losses would not exceed USD 10Mn 99% of the time i.e. the realized
daily losses from the position will, on average, be higher than USD10Mn on only
one day every 100 trading days (i.e. two or three days each year). VaR technique
is based on statistical distributions, standard deviation and confidence levels.
 |
The impact of holding a position of USD1Mn (against LKR) based on the historical
volatility of the USD/LKR currency pair is considered below. The data that is
presented above gives a standard deviation of 2.2539% (for 1 day volatility).
Next the level of confidence that needs to be built into the calculation and the
defeasance period, which is the estimated time taken to liquidate the position or
portfolio, have to be decided on. Both these are matters of bank policy.
The following model could hence be developed;
| VaR = Value of the position x FX Volatility. |
FX Volatility = Number of times σ of FX
Confidence Level - 99% (2.326 standard deviations, generally
required by regulators and fairly conservative)
Defeasance period – 3 days (assuming that it takes 3 days to
liquidate a USD/LKR position)
VaR on a USD 1Mn position will be
=1,000,000 x 2.326 x 2.2539% x √3= USD90k (approx)
Holding period is an important factor in determining volatility since the risk in
any investment is dependent on the time frame.
The square root of maturity period is used to adjust volatility.
VaR (10 days) = VaR (1 day) x √number of days.
The VaR of holding LKR 100Mn of the 01-Jan-09 Treasury Bond is calculated
as follows.
Modified Duration (MD) = Duration / (1+r)
Value of Position LKR 100Mn
Modified Duration of this bond 2.75
Average adverse daily yield move = 0.0079
VaR = 100,000,000 x 2.75 x .0079 = LKR 2,172,500
The above calculations obviously bring out the risk of these positions factor in a
much different light. The fairly harmless foreign exchange position of being long
USD1Mn all of a sudden shows the potential risk of losing approximately LKR
9Mn. Likewise holding LKR 100Mn 5year Treasury Bonds has a potential risk of
LKR 2.2Mn. Key to these calculations is the volatility of the respective exchange
rate or interest rate. In the case of developed markets where options are traded,
volatility is a readily obtainable number but in the case of emerging markets
such as in Sri Lanka, this will need to be worked out on the basis of historical
volatility.
Together with risk management, an important requirement is training, not only
of the front line staff, but also of the senior management, so that they can
understand the business, the risks involved and the key issues of how to manage
the attendant risks
Will market risk management measures such as this when broadly adopted
strengthen dealing room operations and gain the confidence of senior management
to turn Treasury dealing rooms into profit centers that will finally contribute
towards the development of the overall market place?
Although business requirements should be the drivers in implementing these
measures the real push may actually come from the regulator with Basle II needing
to be adopted in the not too distant future.