MODERN METHODS OF INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO RISK MANAGEMENT IN KAZAKHSTAN

ABSTRACT

The article reviews modern methods of investment portfolio risk management with a focus on Kazakhstan. The paper examines the nature of investment risk and summarizes both classical and modern approaches, including diversification, exposure limits, duration management, Value-at-Risk (VaR), Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR), stress testing, currency diversification, and portfolio rebalancing. Special attention is paid to the practical application of these methods in Kazakhstan, where investors face a relatively shallow capital market, limited diversification opportunities, liquidity constraints, and exchange-rate volatility. The article concludes that effective portfolio risk management in Kazakhstan requires a combined approach based on strategic allocation, quantitative risk assessment, and adaptation to local market conditions.

Keywords: investment risk; diversification; VaR; CVaR; stress testing; currency risk; Kazakhstan.

Introduction

Investment portfolio management is closely connected with risk management. Investors not only aim to earn returns, but also to control potential losses caused by market volatility, inflation, interest-rate changes, default risks, and exchange-rate fluctuations. This is especially important for institutional investors, including pension funds, whose primary objective is long-term capital preservation and stable returns.

In Kazakhstan, portfolio risk management has special significance due to the structural features of the local market. The range of instruments is narrower than in developed economies, market liquidity is much lower, and domestic portfolios remain pretty highly exposed to interest-rate and currency risks. Therefore, the study of modern risk management methods is relevant both academically and practically.

The purpose of this article is to review the main portfolio risk management methods and practices that are applicable in Kazakhstan.

1. What is an investment risk?

Investment risk can be defined as the probability that actual portfolio results will differ from expected results. In the broader sense, it includes not only short-term price volatility, but also the risk of capital loss, inflation erosion, liquidity shortages, and mismatches between assets and long-term liabilities.

The main forms of investment risk include market risk, credit risk, liquidity risk, interest-rate risk, and currency risk. For Kazakhstan, interest-rate and currency risks are especially important. Changes in rates affect bond prices, while exchange-rate movements influence the value of foreign assets and domestic inflation.

Thus, portfolio risk should be understood as a multidimensional concept. This explains why modern portfolio management increasingly combines traditional allocation methods with quantitative risk metrics and scenario analysis for more efficient portfolio management.

2. Classical and modern methods of risk management

The classical method of managing portfolio risk is diversification. Markowitz showed that combining assets with imperfect correlation can reduce total portfolio risk [1]. In practice, diversification may be applied across asset classes, issuers, sectors, maturities, and currencies.

Another traditional method is the use of limits. Limits help control concentration by restricting exposure to individual issuers, sectors, currencies, or types of instruments. This method is especially important for institutional investors because it supports discipline in portfolio construction.

An important method for fixed-income portfolios is duration management. Duration reflects how sensitive bond prices are to changes in interest rates. In a high-rate environment, managing duration allows investors to reduce exposure to adverse repricing.

Among modern methods, VaR is one of the most widely used tools. It estimates the potential portfolio loss at a chosen confidence level over a specific time horizon [2]. However, VaR has limitations, since it does not describe the scale of losses beyond the threshold.

For this reason, CVaR is often considered a more informative measure. It reflects the average loss in the worst scenarios beyond the VaR level [3]. This makes CVaR more useful in situations where markets are exposed to extreme downside risks.

Stress testing is another essential tool. Unlike standard statistical measures, stress testing evaluates portfolio resilience under extreme but plausible scenarios, such as a sharp currency depreciation, an increase in yields, or a fall in equity prices. This makes it especially valuable in volatile markets.

Additional practical tools include currency diversification and portfolio rebalancing. Currency diversification helps reduce dependence on domestic macroeconomic shocks, while rebalancing restores target portfolio weights after market movements.

3. Specific features of application in Kazakhstan

The use of these methods in Kazakhstan has several specific features. First, the domestic market is relatively shallow, which limits diversification opportunities. Second, fixed-income instruments play a dominant role in institutional portfolios, making duration and interest-rate sensitivity especially important.

Third, currency risk remains a major issue. Exchange-rate changes affect both inflation and investment returns, so currency diversification becomes not only a return-enhancing tool, but also a form of protection.

Finally, institutional investors in Kazakhstan operate under regulatory and structural constraints. As a result, portfolio risk management is based not only on financial models, but also on investment declarations, exposure rules, and regulatory requirements.

4. Limitations of the local market

The main limitation of the Kazakhstani market is insufficient depth. A narrow range of liquid instruments restricts portfolio choice and makes full diversification difficult. Another limitation is concentration in government and quasi-government securities, which reduces the number of alternative investable assets.

Low secondary-market liquidity is also a serious constraint. Even if a portfolio looks balanced according to formal risk metrics, it may still face losses or difficulties in liquidation under stress conditions.

In addition, all quantitative models have limitations. VaR, CVaR, and duration are useful tools, but they depend on assumptions and historical data. In emerging markets, where structural changes occur more often, these models should be complemented by expert judgment and scenario analysis.

Conclusion

Modern portfolio risk management in Kazakhstan requires both classical and contemporary methods. Diversification, limits, and duration control remain fundamental, while VaR, CVaR, stress testing, currency diversification, and rebalancing provide a broader and more flexible framework.

At the same time, the application of these methods is constrained by the features of the local market, including limited instrument diversity, liquidity restrictions, and high sensitivity to interest-rate and currency shocks. Therefore, the most effective approach for Kazakhstan is an integrated one, combining strategic asset allocation, quantitative analysis, and adaptation to local market realities.

References:

1. Markowitz H. Portfolio selection // The Journal of Finance. — 1952. — Vol. 7, № 1. — P. 77–91.
2. Jorion P. Value at Risk: The New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk. — 3rd ed. — New York : McGraw-Hill, 2007. — 602 p.
3. Rockafellar R.T., Uryasev S. Optimization of Conditional Value-at-Risk // The Journal of Risk. — 2000. — Vol. 2, № 3. — P. 21–42.
4. Fabozzi F.J. Bond Markets, Analysis, and Strategies. — 9th ed. — Harlow : Pearson, 2019.
5. OECD/IOPS Good Practices for Pension Funds’ Risk Management Systems [Электронный ресурс]. — URL: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/iops/en/iops-principles-and-guidelines/OECD%20IOPS%20Good%20Practices%20for%20Pension%20Funds%E2%80%99%20Risk%20Management%20Systems%202011.pdf (дата обращения: 08.04.2026).
6. Overview of the investment portfolio managed by the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan and IPM as of March 1, 2026 [Электронный ресурс] // UAPF (ENPF). — URL: https://www.enpf.kz/en/press-center/news/282388/ (дата обращения: 08.04.2026).
7. Investment portfolios of pension assets managed by the NBRK and IPM as of September 1, 2023 [Электронный ресурс] // UAPF (ENPF). — URL: https://www.enpf.kz/en/press-center/news/18039/ (дата обращения: 08.04.2026).
8. Investment portfolios of pension assets managed by the NBRK and IPM as of August 1, 2022 [Электронный ресурс] // UAPF (ENPF). — URL: https://www.enpf.kz/en/press-center/news/18025/ (дата обращения: 08.04.2026).
9. Kazakhstan — Financial Sector Assessment [Электронный ресурс]. — Washington, DC : World Bank, 2024. — URL: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/099040524124539810 (дата обращения: 08.04.2026).