Skip to content
In academic affiliation with Carnegie Mellon University
Institute of Algorithmic Tradingand Applied Computational Finance

Specialist track, course code RM

Financial Risk Management

Financial risk management in practice: measuring, testing and governing market risk with VaR, expected shortfall, stress tests and the controls around the models themselves.

Financial risk management answers two questions: how much can we lose, and how sure are we of that number. The first is a matter of models such as Value at Risk and expected shortfall. The second is a matter of testing those models against history, against stress scenarios, and against the possibility that the model itself is wrong.

What does the risk management track cover?

Value at Risk covers historical, parametric and Monte Carlo methods and backtesting of VaR exceptions. Stress Testing covers historical and hypothetical scenarios and reverse stress tests. Model Risk Management covers model validation, inventories and governance. Expected Shortfall and CVaR, at Researcher level, covers coherent risk measures and their estimation. FRM Exam Preparation covers the Part I syllabus for candidates sitting the GARP examination.

Where does this track lead?

To the Certificate in Quantitative Risk Management, which adds GARCH volatility modelling and ends in a capstone risk report on a trading book.

Practitioner courses in this track

Lab-based courses. You build, test and cost real strategies and systems on market data.

Researcher courses in this track

Proof-level courses. Stochastic models, estimation theory and the literature behind each method.

Credentials that use this track

Questions applicants ask

Is the FRM preparation course affiliated with GARP?

No. FRM is a designation of the Global Association of Risk Professionals. The Institute’s course prepares candidates for the Part I examination and is not endorsed by GARP.

Which risk measure do regulators use now?

For bank trading books, the Basel Fundamental Review of the Trading Book replaced 99% Value at Risk with 97.5% expected shortfall for internal-model capital. Value at Risk remains in wide use for limits and reporting.