An example for interpreting VAR reads:
A $100m portfolio has a 1.37% VAR at the 5% probability over one week.
So there is a 5% chance that more than $1.37m will be lost and a 95% chance that less than this will be lost.
Similarly, at the 1% VAR, there is a 1% chance that more than $1.37m will be lost and a 99% chance that less will be lost.
The text says: a 1% VAR would be expected to show greater risk than a 5% VAR.
But at 1% VAR, doesn’t it mean there is lower probability (compared to 5% VAR) of greater losses? Why does the 1% VAR show greater risk?
A $100m portfolio has a 1.37% VAR at the 5% probability over one week.
So there is a 5% chance that more than $1.37m will be lost and a 95% chance that less than this will be lost.
Similarly, at the 1% VAR, there is a 1% chance that more than $1.37m will be lost and a 99% chance that less will be lost.
The text says: a 1% VAR would be expected to show greater risk than a 5% VAR.
But at 1% VAR, doesn’t it mean there is lower probability (compared to 5% VAR) of greater losses? Why does the 1% VAR show greater risk?