ML-QuantSubscribe

arXivRisk, Credit & Banking

Backtesting High-Dimensional Expected Shortfall

Orthogonal methods remove bias in downside-risk backtests when estimating high-dimensional Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall forecasts.

Featured in No. 139 on 13 Nov 2026 · 2 days after release

Power against omitted predictors
Figure 1: Power against omitted predictors. Columns compare H_{2} (VaR and ES omissions) and H_{3} (ES-only omissions); rows correspond to 50 and 150 predictors. Curves distinguish sample sizes, \eta measures the omitted effect, and the dashed line denotes the nominal 5% level.
Released
11 Nov 2026
First featured
No. 139 · 13 Nov 2026
Published in
Not yet, as far as Semantic Scholar knows
Fanfare
2 of 5
Identifier
arXiv:2611.13882
Authors
Zaichao Du et al.

Abstract

From arXiv (CC0).

Forecast evaluation increasingly uses high-dimensional predictors, but estimation and regularization of large predictive models can distort conventional backtests. This issue is particularly important for forecasting downside risk, where the signal-to-noise ratio is low. We develop out-of-sample Expected Shortfall (ES) backtests that remove the large first-order bias effects of estimating high-dimensional Value-at-Risk, ES, and the evaluation instrument. In a linear ES specification, the proposed methods are easily implemented as Double Lasso with a tail-size-adjusted score as a generated dependent variable. More generally, we characterize orthogonal ES backtesting moments, and establish oracle equivalence and valid inference under time-series dependence and repeated estimation with overlapping and expanding training windows. Simulations show that conventional backtests can severely overreject ES optimal forecasts, whereas orthogonalization improves size control. An application to downside-growth forecasting for G7 economies finds evidence against a US growth-only ES specification, even though forecast-oriented regularization selects no additional financial predictors. The application also shows that accounting for estimation can change rejection decisions in either direction. These findings highlight the distinct roles of predictive variable selection and backtesting in the evaluation of high-dimensional tail-risk models.

Citations and venue from Semantic Scholar (ODC-BY), refreshed weekly. Summary: Quant Letter (CC BY 4.0).

    Type to search. Try rough volatility, LLM agents or FinGPT.

    ↑↓ move↵ openesc closeFull search page