Skip to main content
aifinhub
Risk & Portfolio Construction Explainer

Expected Shortfall (CVaR)

ES_α = E[L | L > VaR_α]. Equivalently, the average of all losses worse than the VaR threshold over the same horizon and sample. Unlike VaR, ES is a coherent risk measure: it satisfies sub-additivity, so portfolio diversification always reduces ES (or leaves it unchanged), never increases it.

By Orbyd Editorial · AI Fin Hub Team

On This Page

Definition

Expected shortfall (CVaR)

ES_α = E[L | L > VaR_α]. Equivalently, the average of all losses worse than the VaR threshold over the same horizon and sample. Unlike VaR, ES is a coherent risk measure: it satisfies sub-additivity, so portfolio diversification always reduces ES (or leaves it unchanged), never increases it.

Why it matters

ES tells you what a VaR breach actually costs. Two strategies with identical 99% VaR can have ES values that differ by 2x or more — the one with the fatter tail will burn through capital faster when the bad day arrives. Basel IV (FRTB) replaced VaR with ES at 97.5% confidence as the official regulatory metric for trading book capital.

How it works

Compute the loss distribution. Take the (1−α)-quantile (that's VaR). Compute the mean of all losses beyond that quantile. Historical: average the worst α·N returns. Parametric: closed form for Gaussian — ES = μ + σ · φ(z_α) / (1 − Φ(z_α)). Monte Carlo: average simulated losses beyond simulated VaR.

Example

Equity portfolio, 95% ES, parametric Gaussian

Daily mean return μ

0.04%

Daily volatility σ

1.1%

VaR (95%)

1.77%

ES (95%) Gaussian

2.27%

VaR says expect to lose more than 1.77% one day in 20. ES says when that day comes, the average loss is 2.27%. The gap is the tail-shape information VaR throws away.

Key Takeaways

1

ES is coherent (sub-additive); VaR is not.

2

The ES / VaR ratio is a tail-shape diagnostic — Gaussian gives roughly 1.28 at 95%, fatter tails give larger.

3

Empirical ES requires more data than empirical VaR for the same precision because it averages the tail.

Try These Tools

Run the numbers next

FAQ

Questions people ask next

The short answers readers usually want after the first pass.

Because VaR ignores the tail beyond the threshold, and the 2008 crisis exposed how dangerous that is. Basel IV's FRTB framework requires ES at 97.5% — empirically calibrated to a level roughly equivalent to 99% VaR but with the coherence property and explicit tail accounting.

Sources & References

Related Content

Keep the topic connected

Planning estimates only — not financial, tax, or investment advice.