Methanol futures hedging with skewed normal distribution by copula method

References

• L.M. Abadie, N. Goicoechea, I. Galarraga, Carbon risk and optimal retrofitting in cement plants: an application of stochastic modelling, monte carlo simulation and real options analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 142(1) (2017), pp. 3117–3130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Y. Abdullah, S. Birdal, and Y. Ufuk, Maximum likelihood estimation for the parameters of skew normal distribution using genetic algorithm, Swarm. Evol. Comput.38(2) (2018), pp. 127–138.
   Google Scholar
• A.H. Alizadeh, C.Y. Huang, and S.V. Dellen, A regime switching approach for hedging tanker shipping freight rates, Energy Econom. 49(3) (2015), pp. 44–59.
   Google Scholar
• M. Barbi and S. Romagnoli, Skewness, basis risk, and optimal futures demand, Int. Rev. Econom. Finance 58(11) (2018), pp. 14–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• B. Beranger, S.A. Padoan, Y. Xu, and S.A. Sisson, Extremal properties of the univariate extended skew-normal distribution, part A, Stat. Probab. Lett. 147 (2019), pp. 73–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T. Berger, On the isolated impact of copulas on risk measurement: A simulation study, Econ. Model. 58(11) (2016), pp. 475–481.
   Google Scholar
• M. Bernardi, A. Maruotti, and L. Petrella, Skew mixture models for loss distributions: A Bayesian approach, Insur. Math. Econom. 51(3) (2012), pp. 617–623.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Bolance, M. Guillen, E. Pelican, and R. Vernic, Skewed bivariate models and nonparametric estimation for the CTE risk measure, Insur. Math. Econom. 43(3) (2008), pp. 386–393.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Campbell, R. Huisman, and K. Koedijk, Optimal portfolio selection in a value-at-Risk framework, J. Bank. Financ. 25(9) (2001), pp. 1789–1804.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Chen, H. Hong, and J. CStein, Forecasting crashes: trading volume, past returns, and conditional skewness in stock prices, J. Financ. Econ. 61(3) (2001), pp. 345–381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U. Cherubini, E. Luciano, W. Vecchiato, Copula Methods in Finance, John Wiley and Sons Ltd., West Sussex, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• V.K. Chopra and W.T. Ziemba, The effect of errors in means, variances and covariances on optimal portfolio choice, J. Portfolio Manage. 19 (1993), pp. 6–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T.S. Christensen, A. Pircalabu, and E. Høg, A seasonal copula mixture for hedging the clean spark spread with wind power futures, Energy Econom. 78(2) (2019), pp. 64–80.
   Google Scholar
• T. Eichner and A. Wagener, Increases in skewness and three-moment preferences, Math. Soc. Sci. 61(2) (2011), pp. 109–113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Eling, Fitting insurance claims to skewed distributions: are the skew-normal and skew-student good models?, Insur. Math. Econom. 51(2) (2012), pp. 239–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Z.H. Feng, Y.M. Wei, and K. Wang, Estimating risk for the carbon market via extreme value theory: an empirical analysis of the EU ETS, Appl. Energy. 99 (2012), pp. 97–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T. Fung and E. Seneta, Tail asymptotics for the bivariate skew normal, J. Multivar. Anal. 144(2) (2016), pp. 129–138.
   Google Scholar
• H. Ghoddusi and S. Emamzadehfard, Optimal hedging in the US natural gas market: the effect of maturity and cointegration, Energy Econom. 63(3) (2017), pp. 92–105.
   Google Scholar
• X.L. Gong, X.H. Liu, and X. Xiong, Measuring tail risk with GAS time varying copula, fat tailed GARCH model and hedging for crude oil futures, Pacific-Basin Finance J. 55 (2019), pp. 95–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Hemmati, H. Saboori, and S. Saboori, Stochastic risk-averse coordinated scheduling of grid integrated energy storage units in transmission constrained wind-thermal systems within a conditional value-at-risk framework, Energy 113(15) (2016), pp. 762–775.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial System: An Introduction with Application to Biology, Control and Artificial Intelligence, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1975.
   Google Scholar
• J.J. Huang, K.J. Lee, H. Liang, and W.F. Lin, Estimating value at risk of portfolio by conditional copula-GARCH method, Insur. Math. Econom. 45(3) (2009), pp. 315–324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.C. Hull and A.D. White, Value at risk when daily changes in market variables are not normally distributed, J. Derivat. 5(3) (1998), pp. 9–19.
   Google Scholar
• Z. Imen, L. Faten, and Z. Elmoez, Financial contagion in the subprime crisis context: A copula approach, North Am. J. Econom. Finance 47(2) (2019), pp. 269–282.
   Google Scholar
• P. Jackson, D.J. Maude, and W. Perraudin, Bank capital and value at risk, J. Derivat. 4(3) (1997), pp. 73–89.
   Google Scholar
• D.P. Kong, T.Q. Chang, W.J. Dai, Q. Wang, and H. Sun, An improved artificial bee colony algorithm based on elite group guidance and combined breadth-depth search strategy, Inf. Sci. (NY) 442(5) (2018), pp. 54–71.
   Google Scholar
• A. Kraus and R.H. Litzenberger, Skewness preference and the valuation of risk assets, J. Finance. 31(4) (1976), pp. 1085–1100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Kumar, R. Kumari, and V.K. Sharma, A novel hybrid crossover based artificial bee colony algorithm for optimization problem, Int. J. Comput. Appl. 82(8) (2013), pp. 18–25.
   Google Scholar
• B. Liu, Q. Ji, and Y. Fan, Dynamic return-volatility dependence and risk measure of coVaR in the oil market: a time-varying mixed copula model, Energy Econom. 68(10) (2017), pp. 53–65.
   Google Scholar
• Y. Low, R. Kwong, F. Robert, and A. Kjersti, Enhancing mean–variance portfolio selection by modeling distributional asymmetries, J. Econ. Bus. 85(5) (2016), pp. 49–72.
   Google Scholar
• Z.G. Lu, J.T. Qi, B. Wen, and X. Li, A dynamic model for generation expansion planning based on conditional value-at-risk theory under low-carbon economy, Electric Power Syst. Res. 141(12) (2016), pp. 363–371.
   Google Scholar
• R.B. Nelsen, An Introduction to Copulas, Springer, New York, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• D.B. Owen, Tables for computing bivariate normal probabilities, Ann. Stat. 27(4) (1956), pp. 1075–1090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.C. Reboredo and M. Ugando, Downside risks in EU carbon and fossil fuel markets, Math. Comput. Simul. 111(5) (2015), pp. 17–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.C. Reboredo and A. Ugolini, Downside/upside price spillovers between precious metals: A vine copula approach, North Am. J. Econom. Finance 34(11) (2015), pp. 84–102.
   Google Scholar
• M. Roustai, M. Rayati, A. Sheikhi, and A. Ranjbar, A scenario-based optimization of smart energy hub operation in a stochastic environment using conditional-value-at-risk, Sustain. Cities Soc. 39(5) (2018), pp. 309–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.A. Samuelson, The fundamental approximation theorem of portfolio analysis in terms of means, variances, and higher moments, Rev. Econ. Stud. 37 (1970), pp. 537–542.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Segnon, T. Lux, and R. Gupta, Modeling and forecasting the volatility of carbon dioxide emission allowance prices: a review and comparison of modern volatility models, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.69(3) (2017), pp. 692–704.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Sklar, Fonctions de repartition n dimensions et leurs marges, Publication De L'Institut De Statistique L'Universite Paris 8 (1959), pp. 229–231.
   Google Scholar
• H. Tekiner-Mogulkoc, D.W. Coit, and F.A. Felder, Mean-risk stochastic electricity generation expansion planning problems with demand uncertainties considering conditional value-at-risk and maximum regret as risk measures, Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 73(12) (2015), pp. 309–317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W.H. Yu, K. Yang, Y. Wei, and L. Lei, Measuring value-at-Risk and expected shortfall of crude oil portfolio using extreme value theory and vine copula, Physica A Stat. Mech. Appl. 490(9) (2017), pp. 1423–1433.
   Google Scholar
• D. Zachary and G. Alexander, The impact of skew on performance and bias: how skew distorts short term performance, triggers bias, and changes drawdowns, J. Behav. Exp. Finance. 22 (2019), pp. 232–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L.B. Zhang, C.F. Wang, and Z.M. Fang, Optimal hedging ratio model with skewness, Syst. Eng. Theory Pract. 29 (2009), pp. 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• B.Z. Zhu, X.X. Zhou, X.F. Liu, H. Wang, K. He, and P. Wang, Exploring the risk spillover effects among China's pilot carbon markets: A regular vine copula-CoES approach, J. Clean. Prod. 242(1) (2020), pp. 1–7.
   Google Scholar