為了避險，金融機構會大量使用條款靈活的OTC契約，但OTC契約的避險效果會因交易對手的違約而消失。為了彌補交易對手信用風險所導致的潛在損失，交易雙方需要在契約定價階段便考慮交易對手的違約機率。同時，交易對手在面對潛在損失時，違約機率也會相應增加，這稱為錯向風險。本文使用縮減式模型刻畫交易對手的違約機率，並假設此機率受到契約價值的影響，對不同情況下的單方向信用價值調整進行計算，探討錯向風險的存在對衍生性金融商品契約價值的影響。

It is common for financial Institutes to use OTC financial derivative contracts to hedge their risk, which will be influenced by the default of counterparty. To reduce the loss caused by the counterparty credit risk, both two trading parties should take into account the probability of counterparty default in the beginning of contract making process. Meanwhile, the default probability of counterparty will raise when then counterparty is facing potential loss, which is called Wrong Way Risk. In this paper, the author will use reduced form model to model the probability of counterparty default, which is assumed to be affected by the contract value, and calculate the unilateral credit value adjustment under different circumstances, discussing the influence of wrong way risk to the contract value of financial derivatives.

1. Arora, N., Gandhi, P., & Longstaff, F. A. (2012). Counterparty credit risk and the credit default swap market. Journal of Financial Economics, 103(2), 280-293.
2. Cespedes, J. C. G., de Juan Herrero, J. A., Rosen, D., & Saunders, D. (2010). Effective modeling of wrong way risk, counterparty credit risk capital, and alpha in Basel II. The Journal of Risk Model Validation, 4(1), 71.
3. Hull, J., & White, A. (2012). CVA and wrong-way risk. Financial Analysts Journal, 68(5), 58-69.
4. Rosen, D., & Saunders, D. (2012). CVA the wrong way. Journal of Risk Management in Financial Institutions, 5(3), 252-272.
5. Sokol, A. (2010). A practical guide to Monte Carlo CVA. Lessons from the Financial Crisis, 379-406.
6. Vasicek, O. (1977). An equilibrium characterization of the term structure. Journal of financial economics, 5(2), 177-188.