How do I fix a Monte Carlo VaR workflow that mixes log returns and simple returns?
My simulation uses correlated log returns for each asset, but then I aggregate the portfolio as if the weighted sum were still a log return. I can tell something is off, but I am not sure where the correction belongs.
The fix is to be consistent about what object you are aggregating.
For multi-asset portfolios, the weighted sum relationship applies cleanly to simple returns, not to log returns. A safer workflow is:
- Simulate correlated log returns for each asset.
- Convert each simulated asset log return into a simple return.
- Aggregate asset simple returns using portfolio weights.
- Translate the resulting portfolio return into portfolio profit and loss.
- Sort losses and read the VaR percentile.
Why this matters:
- log returns are convenient for statistical modeling
- portfolio aggregation is naturally done on value changes or simple returns
- skipping the conversion can bias the simulated loss distribution
If the portfolio includes options or other nonlinear products, go one step further: simulate the risk factors, reprice the instruments, and compute portfolio P&L directly instead of aggregating asset-return formulas that no longer describe the true payoff.
Master Part I / Part II bridge with our FRM Course
64 lessons · 120+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
Why is DV01 so much smaller than dollar duration if both are supposed to measure rate risk?
When should I stop using modified duration and switch to effective duration?
How should I think about the relationship between Macaulay duration and modified duration instead of memorizing two separate definitions?
Why do hedge calculations often use dollar duration or DV01 instead of just modified duration?
When should I prefer historical simulation VaR over delta-normal VaR?
Related Articles
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.