Assume my portfolio has a current market value of $V_0$, that the daily returns are independent and identically distributed as a normal distribution $N(0, \sigma^2)$ and that there are $N$ trading days in a year. Also, let $\Phi$ denote the cdf of the standard normal distribution.
The Value at Risk rescaling formula says that $$\text{VaR}_{\alpha,N}=\text{VaR}_{\alpha,1}\times\sqrt{N}=V_0\times\Phi^{-1}(\alpha)\times\sigma\times\sqrt{N}$$
Now, let $V$ be the portfolio's value after the $N$-day period. It is clear that $$V=V_0\times\prod_{i=1}^{N}(1+R_i)$$ $$\log(V)=\log(V_0)+\sum_{i=1}^{N}\log(1+R_i)$$ and, by the Taylor expansion of $\log(1+x)$ we get that $$\log(V)=\log(V_0)+\sum_{i=1}^{N}R_i$$ plus smaller terms. Applying the central limit theorem we get that $$\log(V)\sim N\left(\log(V_0),N\sigma^2\right)$$ and thus $\text{VaR}_{\alpha,N}$ is the number $x$ such that $$\mathbf{P}(V\le x)=\alpha$$ But $$\mathbf{P}(V\le x)=\mathbf{P}(\log(V)\le \log(x))=\Phi\left(\frac{\log(x)-\log(V_0)}{\sqrt{N}\sigma}\right)$$ and therefore $$\text{VaR}_{\alpha,N}=x=\exp(\log(V_0)+\sqrt{N}\sigma\Phi^{-1}(\alpha))=V_0\exp(\sqrt{N}\sigma\Phi^{-1}(\alpha))$$ which is certainly different from the usual formula.
Question: why are the two formulas different? What am I missing? Is the difference caused solely by the approximation $\log(1+x)\approx x$?
Thanks in advance!