Monday 22 July 2013

Beyond the concepts of Risk and Risk Management






The current economic crisis indicates that conventional risk assessment, rating and management techniques don’t perform well in a turbulent and global environment. AAA-rated companies and banks have suddenly failed, demonstrating the limitations of not only risk management techniques but also the need to re-think the expensive and sophisticated Business Intelligence and Corporate Performance Management infrastructure that modern corporations have relied on. But what are the origins of the financial meltdown that is spilling over into the real economy? Why is the economy increasingly fragile? We identify three main causes: excessively complex financial products, globalized financial markets that lack regulations and usage of subjective computational models that are naturally limited to less turbulent scenarios.


Models are only Models. No matter how sophisticated, a model is always based on a series of assumptions. More sophistication means more assumptions. Classical risk evaluation models, because of their subjective nature, are inherently unable to capture the unexpected and pathological events that have punctuated human history, not to mention the economy. But there is more. Conventional Business Intelligence is unable to cope with the hidden complexity of a modern global corporation precisely because it thrives on unrealistic mathematical models. Once defined, a model is condemned to deliver only what has been hard-wired into its formulation. However, a difficulty in analysing our inherently turbulent economy and, more specifically, financial instabilities, lies in the fact that most of the crises manifest themselves in a seemingly unique manner. Life very rarely follows a Gaussian distribution and the future is constantly under construction.

  

Excessively complex financial products have spread hidden risks to every corner of the globe. Their degree of intricacy is such that they are often beyond the control of those who have created them. Derivatives of derivatives of derivatives …. The speculative use of such products creates an explosive mixture. Because of the global nature of our economy, and due to its spectacular degree of interconnectedness, such products are an ideal vehicle for creating and transmitting uncertainty.


Uncertain and global economy. It is because of the laws of physics that our economy is increasingly uncertain, unstable and interconnected. This means that it is becoming increasingly complex and turbulent. Conventional methods that rely on mathematical models are unable to capture and embrace this complexity, not to mention predict crises. The increase of complexity is inevitable and globalization is an inevitable consequence of the growth of complexity.



Complexity is a fundamental property of every dynamical system. Like many things, it can be managed provided it can be measured. As for most things in life, when managed, complexity becomes an asset. When ignored, it becomes a liability, a time bomb. Because of the laws of physics, the spontaneous increase of complexity in all spheres of social life is inevitable. Like for most things in life, every system possesses its own maximum level of sustainable complexity. Close to this limit, known as critical complexity, it becomes fragile, hence vulnerable. This is the fundamental reason why each corporation should know its value of complexity, as well as the corresponding critical value.

  
Complexity can be measured. Ontonix is the first company to have developed and marketed a radically innovative and unique technology for rational quantification and management of complexity. Introduced in 2005, OntoSpace™, our flagship product, is the World’s first complexity management system. While others struggle with definitions of complexity, we have been measuring the complexity of banks, corporations, financial products, mergers, or crises already since 2005. Our complexity measure is objective. It is natural. No fancy mathematics, statistics or exotic models. A 100% model-free approach guarantees an objective look at a corporation.



Hidden and growing complexity is the main enemy of a corporation. A corporation may still be profitable but close to default. Highly complex systems are difficult to manage and may suddenly collapse. Excessive complexity is the true source of risk.
  
Critically complex systems become almost impossible to manage, hence are vulnerable and greatly exposed to both internal and external sources of uncertainty.  



Complexity X Uncertainty = Fragility™. This simple yet fundamental equation has been coined by Ontonix and establishes the philosophy and logic behind our technology and services offering. The bottom line is simple: a complex business process, operating in an uncertain environment, is a fragile mix. Since the uncertainty of the global economy cannot be easily altered, in order to operate at acceptable levels of fragility one must necessarily reduce the complexity of the corresponding business model. Based on this logic Complexity Management goes beyond Risk Management and establishes a new underlying paradigm for a superior and holistic form of Business Intelligence. A technology of the Third Millennium.



Conventional techniques provide insufficient to insure against all future contingencies.
There are numerous recent examples of AAA-rated corporations that have suddenly defaulted or are in serious difficulty. The collapse of the Lehman Brothers Bank is a prominent case.  Based on the financial highlights of the bank in the period 2004-2008, our analysis has indicated how a quickly increasing complexity provided crisis precursors, hinting more than a year before default that the system was in difficulty. Evidently, the management was unaware that complexity was sky-rocketing as it is invisible to conventional methods. 



The bottom line: manage complexity.



 







 
 

Resilience Map of the EU


Resilience is reflects the capability of a system to withstand shocks and extreme events.Based on macro-economic data provided on a quarterly basis by Eurostat, we measure the resilience of the EU member states. The result is illustrated in the map above, where one may see that the most resilient countries are the UK, Italy and Sweden.

In the economy, high resilience does not necessarily imply high performance. It simply measure a sort of "stability" of a system functioning in a turbulent regime. The economy of Germany, for example, performs better than that of Italy but is less resilient. This means that is more fragile and vulnerable in the case of extreme events, shocks or contagion. It may sound counter-intuitive but there are many examples of systems that perform very well and yet are very unhealthy. Think, for example, of medicine. One may be climbing Mount Everest and be gravely ill. Fragility - the opposite to resilience - is an invisible characteristic if one concentrates only on performance. Resilience, therefore, must become a new and strategic KPI of a modern business.

More details on resilience may be found here.

The list of resilience values per country is available here.


www.ontonix.com




Ontonix and Wikirating Announce Collaboration Agreement


Como, Zurich, July 22, 2013 – Ontonix and Wikirating have signed a collaboration agreement with the objective of providing jointly a new and strong message to investors and markets: in a turbulent and globalized economy, new models of rating, beyond the conventional albeit outdated approaches are necessary. "In a turbulent context, traditional ratings don't perform and, as the current crisis shows so eloquently, they can actually become a triggering factor" said Dr. J.Marczyk, the Founder and President of Ontonix. "We believe that in order to avoid the next, worse crisis, ratings must be democratized and turned into a commodity" he added. "Investors need a generally available and reliable rating system but also SMEs should be able to afford a rating in order to participate better in the global economy" he added. "The most important characteristic of such a rating system is that it should be independent, reliable and objective" said D. Credé, the Founder and President of Wikirating. "We believe that the ideal place for such a rating is the internet - the central nervous system of our planet". "Joining forces with Ontonix will be an important step in the direction of providing this new and attractive capability" he concluded.


About Wikirating
Wikirating is a worldwide independent, transparent and collaborative rating organization. It offers an open, editable centralized place for all credit rating related topics, and credit ratings for countries, corporations and other financial products. Wikirating unites rating experts,  economists and normal people, similar to Wikipedia, but with a stronger and stricter peer review concept. Wikirating received a substantial worldwide attention, it was mentioned in more than 50 international press articles in 18 countries among which "Neue Zuercher Zeitung" (Switzerland), "Financial Times" (Germany) and "Financial Post" (Canada). For more information visit our site.


About Ontonix
Ontonix, a privately held company established in 2005, develops award-winning, leading-edge software offering new, innovative analytics solutions to manage risk and optimize performance. The Company and its founder, Dr, Jacek Marczyk, have pioneered the creation of innovative analytic solutions in the field of Quantitative Complexity Management. OntoNet™, the company's flagship product, is a powerful, cloud-based complexity quantification and management system designed to support user applications in identifying potential crisis, securing strategic, business, and economic intelligence, and developing unique analytics metrics, such as near real-time holistic resilience ratings, to create new ways to measure resilience and how well organizations respond to change and turbulence of the global economy. Ontonix is headquarted in Como, Italy. For more information visit the company's website.

Sunday 21 July 2013

On the REAL debt of EU countries


To find out about the real debt of EU countries, read here (and be prepared for some surprises!).


www.ontonix.com




Saturday 20 July 2013

Beyond Credit Rating Agencies: A New Post-Crisis Rating System


Avoiding the next financial crisis may not be easy but if there is one factor that may potentially contribute to the next meltdown that is today's rating system. Ratings are a pivotal tool for investors and for the economy in general but, at the same time, a corrupt and subjective rating system is a devastating tool of deception, manipulation and destruction of the economy.

The Financial Crisis Senate Commission in the US has identified the Credit Rating Agencies as the key enabling factor of the financial meltdown. Recently, an interesting article has recently appeared which speaks of "Corrupted Credit Ratings". A section of the article states:

In response to the civil lawsuit filed by the US Department of Justice in February 2013, Standard & Poor’s affirms that its ratings were “objective, independent and uninfluenced by conflicts of interest”. This column presents empirical evidence opposing this claim. The data suggests a systematic rating bias in favour of the agencies’ largest issuer clients.

Ratings are easy to manipulate, especially by the largest and most powerful clients and, of course, by those who control the rating agencies themselves. This is called conflict of interest.

Given the current state of the rating industry, reforming the system won't work.

What our troubled economy needs is a rating system that everyone can rely on. It must have at least the following characteristics:


  • Independent: no issuers involved, investment funds don't control it
  • Objective: human judgement must not used to issue the final rating
  • Consistent: the same results must be obtained using the same data 
  • Scientific: ratings must be obtained scientifically, not based on subjective opinion.
  • Global: the system must be web-based, guaranteeing everyone access
  • Fast: given that the economy is turbulent and fast a rating changes accordingly
  • Affordable: even SMEs must be able to purchase a rating
  • Specifically built for a turbulent economy: current ratings are anachronistic - they use outdated technology which has been conceived in a World which no longer exists.

Such a rating system exists - it is called Rate-A-Business. It works for any business, both for small companies as well as for multi-national corporations.

But there is more. Rate-A-Business not only provides a rating, it also indicates any potential weaknesses and shows you where to intervene in order to improve the state of health of a business. ABC ratings are incapable of delivering similar information to the public.


Click the image below to access the system.





Try it for FREE here.

Read a Resilience Rating Tutorial here.

See numerous examples here.





Rate-A-Business is science, not opinions. 



www.ontonix.com





Friday 19 July 2013

How to Best Breakup The Eurozone?



The Eurozone is in an extremely fragile situation with a one-star resilience rating for the past year and a half. The system is reaching critical complexity very quickly and inexorably (current complexity is approximately 390, the critical value at which breakup is inevitable is around 426).

First of all, highly complex systems, such as today's economy, are basically out of control - the current crisis is sufficient empirical proof - and their dynamics is beyond our comprehension. There is no way we can describe such a system using traditional mathematics. No model will work here. Secondly, politics is not only unwilling to intervene, it is incapable of any form of intervention because of the immense complexity of the problem and, if that were not enough, political agendas are imposed by finance. Governments are giving up sovereignty whether they like it or not. This compounds the problem further. It appears the system will break up.  There is talk of establishing a two-speed EU.


We have performed an analysis of a set of hypothetical scenarios, in which the system would be "split" into clusters of countries with a certain degree of affinity. We have measured the resilience of each cluster. The following groups of countries have been analyzed:

 

EU 15 (this is the entire system):
Complexity = 167.1, Resilience = 56%


G7 (France, Germany, Italy and UK):
Complexity = 52.7, Robustness = 66%


G7 - UK
Complexity = 38,7, Robustness = 67%


PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain)
Complexity = 57.6, Robustness = 58%


MED (France, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain)
Complexity = 72.1, Robustness = 59%


MED - Greece and Portugal
Complexity = 41.9, Robustness = 59%


EU 15 - G7
Complexity = 116.8, Robustness = 55%


Northern Countries (UK. Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands)
Complexity = 76.1, Robustness = 66%


EU15 - G7 - Northern countries
Complexity = 86.6, Robustness = 56%


The following conclusions can be drawn:


  • The entire system (EU15) has a low robustness - 56%
  • The G7 countries as a group have a robustness of 66%, that is 10% higher than the entire system
  • The G7 group, excluding the UK (which hasn't adopted the Euro) is slightly more robust - 67%
  • Placing Italy in the MED group would make little sense because the robustness would be only 59%
  • The Northern countries enjoy a robustness of 66%
  • The remaineder of EU15 - the G7 and Northern countries would have a robustness of 56%, equal to that of the entire system today

The point is now this. Since trying to manage a huge, higly complex and fragile system is risky business, it is better to break it up into less complex and more robust sub-systems, attempting to fix each one. This does not guarantee that the whole will perform better. However, the fact is that today the entire system is extremely vulnerable. Before we start to fix the problem we must cast it in a form in which a fix may be attempted and with better chances of success. We therefore suggest to "break up" the EU15 into the following clusters of countries:


  1. Germany, France and Italy - the robustness of this group is 67%
  2. UK, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and the Netherlands - the robustness is 66%
  3. All remaining countries - robustness is 56%

The idea is not to institute different currencies in these groups. The idea is to cluster countries into more homogenous groups, so that a more specific cure can be deployed in these groups, not in single countries. Italy, for example, does not belong to the PIIGS, as it has a solid banking system and the EU's second largest manufacturing industry, not to mention that it has a low level of private debt. Imposing severe austerity measures on a country like Italy is counterproductive. The recent tax increases are contributing to the destruction of the real economy, favoring only the speculators.


Austerity measures and other policies should be applied in a coordinated fashion and, most importantly, to "homogenous" groups of countries to be most effective. This will avoid weakening countries that can help those in trouble and will allow to treat the system in a way that takes into account its natural structural properties. Trying to fix the problem based on uncoordinated ad-hoc interventions, focusing on one country at a time and strangling its economy, is going to favor the domino effect which everyone wants to avoid so badly (really?).


Wednesday 17 July 2013

No Measurement No Science



 
Can there exist a science, any branch of science, that doesn't measure the object of its investigation? Imagine physics with no measurements. Imagine the laws of gravity or the laws of Newton without measuring the mass or acceleration of bodies. Imagine doctors trying to lower cholesterol without ever measuring it. The evolution of science is man's struggle to invent new ways of measuring and inventing metrics, to come up with ingenious means of squeezing more precision and accuracy. Recall the experiments of Cavendish or Michelson-Moreley which provided us with values of the Gravitational Constant and speed of light. What would modern cosmology be without Hubble's constant?

The act of measurement is not only an act of courage, it is also when science gets serious. The rational practice of measurement, classification and ranking of objects or phenomena constitute first step towards scientific activity. Science has the scope of establishing theories which can help explain natural phenomena and understand Nature. Measurements, provide ideas, insights, these in turn suggest conjectures which may end up one day as established theories (until a better theory is proposed).

But when can you actually call something a theory? People often use the expression "I have a theory" about this or that. However, from a strict and scientific point of view, a theory is something that can be verified (or falsified) via an appropriately designed and repeatable experiment that can be performed by an independent team of scientists. Once a theory has been established and accepted, it typically produces:

  • a law, or a fundamental theorem (or series of theorems)
  • a characteristic constant (G, h, c, etc.)
  • a basic equation (or equations)

Consider now the so-called "complexity science" which has been around now for a few decades. It has produced none of the above: no characteristic constant, no equations, no laws. What is most disconcerting, it has never produced a workable definition of complexity, not to mention a measure thereof. Scientists engage in long disquisitions as to complexity and its mysterious properties, they even say that something is more complex than something else, and yet, without ever measuring complexity. How is that possible? Can we call this science? Certainly not.

One of the objects of this "complexity science" are storms of birds, typically starlings, which every now and then get together by the thousands and offer elegant and breathtaking displays of their ability to avoid collisions and, at the same time, to give rise to beautiful and organized shapes. All this is done without a master choreographer, spontaneously. Complexity scientists say, in awe, "now that is a complex system". How they come to that conclusion is a bit of a mystery. The surprising thing is that they are never curious as to how complex that thing really is. 55, 70, 150? Well, we are. We have measured the complexity of storms of starlings. In particular, we have analyzed four scenarios originating from the same storm.

Scenario 1
 

Scenario 2
 

Scenario 3
 

Scenario 4
 

Here are the results, with the corresponding Complexity Maps. Your intuition may be challenged.



Scenario 1: Complexity = 121.5
Scenario 2: Complexity = 230.4
Scenario 3: Complexity = 269.1
Scenario 4: Complexity = 128.6

It may not be a result of any particular practical use. Today. However, the above is a small piece of modern complexity science.