On Stability and Decomposition of Sample Quantiles under Heavy-Tailed Distributions
For researchers and practitioners in finance and risk management who rely on Value-at-Risk estimates from heavy-tailed data, this work offers a refined decomposition to understand and potentially mitigate estimation instability.
This paper addresses the instability of sample quantiles for heavy-tailed distributions when both the projection direction and quantile threshold are estimated. It introduces a Q-Q orthogonality decomposition that separates the effects of projection direction changes and quantile threshold fluctuations, providing a more precise stability analysis than standard Bahadur representations.
We study sample quantiles of distributions indexed by estimated parameters, with a on Value-at-Risk related to linear projections of financial returns that whose underlying probability law is heavy-tailed. In this setting, the projection direction and the empirical quantile threshold are estimated from the data, so the standard Bahadur representation under a fixed distribution does not separate the distinct sources of instability. A canonical starting point is Bahadur's representation, which expresses the sample quantile through the empirical distribution function plus a remainder term \cite{bahadur1966}. Empirical-process theory provides a usable scaffolding through the mechanics of half-spaces, symmetric differences, and Glivenko--Cantelli uniform convergence. They yield stability bounds, but absorb changes in projection direction and changes in quantile threshold into a single symmetric-difference measure. Interestingly, a global uniform-convergence requirement is imposed on what is intrinsically a local quantile-stability problem. This paper introduces a Q-Q orthogonality formulation for separating projection-direction and quantile-threshold effects. The object of interest is the difference between the empirical quantile computed using the estimated projection direction and the population quantile computed at the reference projection direction. We decompose this difference into three terms, $\hat q_α(\hat w)-q_α(w_0)=D_1+D_2+D_3$. Here, $D_1$ measures the population quantile movement induced by perturbing the projection direction, $D_2$ measures the empirical quantile fluctuation with the projection direction held fixed, and $D_3$ is the Bahadur-type remainder.