  In recent years research on credit risk modelling has mainly focused on
default probabilities. Recovery rates are usually modelled independently, quite
often they are even assumed constant. Then, however, the structural connection
between recovery rates and default probabilities is lost and the tails of the
loss distribution can be underestimated considerably. The problem of
underestimating tail losses becomes even more severe, when calibration issues
are taken into account. To demonstrate this we choose a Merton-type structural
model as our reference system. Diffusion and jump-diffusion are considered as
underlying processes. We run Monte Carlo simulations of this model and
calibrate different recovery models to the simulation data. For simplicity, we
take the default probabilities directly from the simulation data. We compare a
reduced-form model for recoveries with a constant recovery approach. In
addition, we consider a functional dependence between recovery rates and
default probabilities. This dependence can be derived analytically for the
diffusion case. We find that the constant recovery approach drastically and
systematically underestimates the tail of the loss distribution. The
reduced-form recovery model shows better results, when all simulation data is
used for calibration. However, if we restrict the simulation data used for
calibration, the results for the reduced-form model deteriorate. We find the
most reliable and stable results, when we make use of the functional dependence
between recovery rates and default probabilities.
