Model Construction & Forecast Based Portfolio Allocation:
|
|
- Paulina Hunter
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 QBUS6830 Financial Time Series and Forecasting Model Construction & Forecast Based Portfolio Allocation: Is Quantitative Method Worth It? Members: Bowei Li (303083) Wenjian Xu ( ) Xiaoyun Lu ( ) 0
2 Executive Summary The aim of this report is to compare four forecasting models: ARMA-ARCH, ARMA-GARCH, ARMA-EGARCH and Historical Simulation of last 00 days (HS-00) for four different industries in Australia, which are Energy, Financial, Telecomm and Consumer. The forecasts generated for each industry under each model are utilised for allocating portfolio weights on the basis of three allocation strategies: return, standard deviation and Value at Risk (VaR). Finally, the models are evaluated based on the investment outcome. It was found that the GARCH type models did better in terms of forecast accuracy and investment outcomes in general. As for the return forecast accuracy, the ARCH and the EGARCH perform better overall. However, these two models do not necessarily generate higher returns. As for forecast of volatility, the GARCH and the EGARCH performed better in terms of accuracy, however, the ARCH generate the best investment outcomes under the Volatility Strategy. It provides the highest return and lowest standard deviation across different forecasting frequencies. As for VaR, the forecasts generated by the EGARCH are accurate in general. Moreover, the model also performs better in terms of investment outcome. By comparing across different allocating strategies, the VaR Strategy, which is also the most conservative strategy, generated the best investment outcomes either in the context of return or risk. It also has the highest utility score among all the strategies in our analysis. The Volatility Strategy ranked the second, and the Return Strategy performed the worst. It could be more truthful when doing investment after the GFC period. In this report, we also compared our outcomes with the simple equally weighted portfolio. The equally weighted portfolio ranked before the portfolio outcome on the basis of Return Strategy. However, Volatility Strategy and VaR Strategy performed better than the simple equally weighted portfolio in terms of investment outcome. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that all our quantitative effort is worth doing.
3 Table&of&Contents&. Introduction Exploratory Data Analysis Models for Forecasting Motivations of Model Selection Model Selection ARMA-ARCH-t Model ARMA-GARCH-t Model ARMA-EGARCH-t Historical Simulation Model Construction for the Other Industries Forecast and Accuracy Measures Return Forecast and Accuracy One-Step-Ahead Return Forecast Multi-period Return Forecast Volatility Forecast and Accuracy One-Step-Ahead Volatility Forecast Multi-period Volatility Forecast VaR Forecast and Accuracy One-step ahead forecast of VaR Multi-step ahead forecast of VaR Optimal Portfolio Allocation Portfolio Allocation Methods Fixed Weight Portfolio Construction Dynamic Weight Portfolio Construction Utility Score for Portfolios Conclusion List of References
4 . Introduction The aim of this report is to evaluate and compare different models and portfolio allocation methods in the context of four sector portfolios in Australia. The ARMA-ARCH, ARMA-GARCH and ARMA-EGARCH models are utilised as parametric models while the historical simulation method as the non-parametric model in this report. In addition, the four portfolios under evaluation are: Energy, Financials, Telecommunication and Consumer Staples, data of which are from Yahoo Finance (202). The daily returns of the sector portfolios are employed in this report with a time span of 0 years, constituting a sample size of The in sample period is from June 2002 to 3 December 2009 with a size of 880, and therefore a forecasting period of 607. The report will first present an Exploratory Data Analysis and model construction of the in-sample period data. Next, one-step-ahead and multi-step-ahead forecasts will be conducted to generate return, volatility and VaR forecasts during the forecast period by using the models identified above. Forecast accuracy will also be evaluated and analysed. Afterwards, the forecasts will be used to generate weights for portfolio allocation under three strategies which are Return Strategy, Volatility Strategy and VaR Strategy. The final part of this report will discusses and assesses the investment outcomes under different models and different allocation methods by comparing the mean, standard deviation and utility score of each portfolio. As a result, we can evaluate whether investments are better off by using the quantitative methods. 2. Exploratory Data Analysis The log returns are calculated and used within the entire report as suggested by Tsay (200). The log return has the attractive attribute of additive. The Figure below plots each portfolio log returns over time. As can be seen from the plot, all portfolios tend to have a daily mean return around zero. The portfolio returns have a considerably higher volatility during the GFC period (after the 370th data point) as separated by the blue line. Overall, the Energy portfolio shows the highest return close to 9.2% and the lowest return around -2.6%, which are pointed out with red arrow in the plot. Moreover, the Energy sector exhibits high volatility over time, even during the pre-crisis period with its extreme returns circled in magenta. In addition, the Financials industry presents remarkably higher volatility during the GFC period in comparison with the non-crisis period, which is circled in green. The consumer portfolio exhibited the lowest volatility among the four industries. 3
5 Table : Summary statistics for each asset Figure : Portfolio Returns (In-sample period) Mean Median Std Min Max Skewness Kurtosis Energy Financials Telecomm Consumer As can be seen from the table above, all assets had positive average and median daily returns around zero during the in sample period. In addition, Financials and Telecomm have standard deviation around.3%. Energy had the highest volatility of.6, which has been observed in the plot above. The Consumer industry has the lowest volatility of.04%. Overall, the daily returns range between % and 9.2%, which is also the highest value and lowest value of Energy industry. A clear overview of the skewness and kurtosis can be obtained by combining the summary statistics with their histograms (Figure 2). All portfolios exhibit negative skewness, except for Telecomm. Moreover, the histogram suggests that the skewness of each portfolio is influenced by their extreme values, which are a number of extreme negative values outweigh the positive ones for the portfolios except for Telecomm. The kurtosis of each portfolio returns are way above 3, which indicates the existence of outliers and fat-tails in return distribution, therefore, the forecast models below used the t-distribution instead of the Gaussian distribution. Figure 2: Histogram for each portfolio
6 3. Models for Forecasting 3. Motivations of Model Selection The ARMA model is used as quantitative method for modelling the mean equation. We expect the financial time series data to be analysed have autocorrelation effects. Therefore, ARMA model are used to capture the autocorrelation effects and patterns by including the lagged return series and including the lagged error series in the mean equations. As for the variance equations, ARCH, GARCH and EGARCH are employed for modelling the volatilities as the financial time series data may have the issue of heteroskedasticity. The ARCH model is represented as the basic volatility model, which is expected to characterize the time series data by including lagged innovation terms, while GARCH model is a more generalised model by including lagged variance terms. The EGARCH model is chosen as it has fewer restrictions on its parameters in the equations because of the log form variance equation. In addition, the model is able to measure the leverage effect. Moreover, due the issue of fat-tailed behaviour discussed above, the error terms will be in standard Student-t distribution, which allows for higher kurtosis and fatter tails to capture outliers. Therefore, the quantitative models for asset returns are ARMA-ARCH, ARMA-GARCH and ARMA-EGARCH with t distribution. 3.2 Model Selection The section below will discuss each model for each asset in details. Firstly, the orders for each model are selected based on the result of AIC and SIC. After that, several tests are conducted against the assumptions for each model. The LB test will be conducted to test for any autocorrelation among standardised residual and the ARCH effect among the squared residuals. Further, the JB test is conducted for test the normality of the standardised residuals. Finally, models will be refined based on the results for each test. The Consumer industry will be evaluated in detail for illustration ARMA-ARCH-t Model As for the mean equation, the AIC find the appropriate orders of AMRA (3, 3) while SIC favours ARMA (, ). We will trust SIC and choose ARMA (, ). Again, AIC and SIC are used to find the appropriate orders for ARCH (p): 5
7 Figure 3: AIC & SIC for choosing ARCH orders The Figure 3 shows that both AIC and SIC prefer ARCH (9). So, we will fit ARMA (, )-ARCH (9) -t model: r = r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t t t t t t 8.04 (s.e) (0.027) (0.48) (0.48) σ = a a a a a t t t 2 t 3 t 4 t 5 (s.e) (0.029) (0.039) (0.033) (0.028) (0.033) (0.028) a a + 0.2a + 0.3a t 6 t 7 t 8 t 9 (0.029) (0.030) (0.038) (0.037) The absolute value of AR parameter is less than, so the AR () is stationary. Moreover, the absolute value of MA parameter is less than as well; therefore, the MA () is invertible. The parameter estimates for AR and MA are not significant. However, we still leave them in the mean equation at this stage. All the parameter estimates are positive and significantly different to zero, expect for the 5 th parameter in the ARCH. The volatility persistence is estimated 0.866, which is less than, so the stationarity requirement is met. The low degree of freedom estimates (8.04) indicates much fatter tails than a Gaussian. The standardized residuals aˆ t little remaining auto-correlation or obvious heteroskedasticity. / ˆ σ, are plotted below (Figure 4). According to the ACF, it shows t 6
8 Figure 4: Standardised rediduals and its ACF To confirm that, the LB test is conducted with outcomes summarized in the table below. The p-value from the LB test shows that we do not reject the null hypothesis of no remaining autocorrelation, at 5% significance level. So, it seems the mean equation is reasonably modelled well by ARMA (, ). The ARMA actually helps here, though their parameter estimates are insignificant. LB tests: H0: ρ = ρ2 =... = ρm = 0 HA:at least one of ρi 0 ( i=,2... m) Table 2: LB test results (residuals) for ARMA-ARCH-t m=7, d.f=5 m=22, d.f=0 m=27,d.f=5 p-value The histogram of these transformed standardized residuals (see Figure 5) appears slightly more fattailed than a normal distribution, with two large outliers around 3.5 and However, the QQ-plot does not depart much at all from normality in either upper or lower tail, which may seem that it is very close to a standard Gaussian. Figure 5: Histogram for standardised residual and its QQ plot As for the normality of the standardized residuals, the JB test can be conducted with: H0 :skewness=0 AND kurtosis=3 H A :the distribution is not Normal 7
9 The result shows a p-value of 0.5, indicating the Gaussianity of standardized residuals. Furthermore, we cannot reject that the residuals come from a Student-t distribution. The sample skewness and kurtosis are also calculated to confirm the test: it has a skewness of and kurtosis of 2.99, which seem very close to the Gaussian distribution (0 and 3). The ACF for the squared standardised residuals aˆ / ˆ σ are plotted below in Figure 6. It displays 2 2 t t some significant correlations at the 8 th lag and 6 th lag, which means the volatility equation might not well specified by an ARCH (9). Figure 6: ACF for squared standardised residuals Table 3: LB test results (squared residuals) for ARMA-ARCH-t m=7, d.f=5 m=22, d.f=0 m=27,d.f=5 p-value The p-value of the LB test indicates strongly significant remaining ARCH effects in the squared standardized residuals. Therefore, the ARMA (, )-ARCH (9)-t may have not capture adequate ARCH effects. To refine the model, we will choose a higher order ARCH model. For example, we choose to re-fit ARMA (, )-ARCH (6)-t, and again, conduct LB test for the squared residuals. Table 4: LB test results (squared residuals) after refine m=24, d.f=5 m=29, d.f=0 m=34,d.f=5 p-value As can be seen from the table, the p-values are still very small and thereby indicating strongly significant remaining ARCH effects in the standardized residuals in the ARMA (, )-ARCH (6)-t model. This might be explained the properties of the ARCH model that it does not include any lagged variance in the volatility equation. Therefore, the model cannot be simply improved by increase ARCH s order. We will still use the ARMA (, )-ARCH (9)-t as chosen by SIC. 8
10 3.2.2 ARMA-GARCH-t Model The ARMA-GARCH model follows the same step as the ARMA-ARCH model. We will fit the ARMA (, )-GARCH (, ) with t-distribution as suggested by SIC. r = r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t t t t t t 8.89 (s.e)(0.026) (0.4) (0.4) σ = a σ t t t (s.e) (0.0026) (0.02) (0.0) The absolute value of AR parameter is less than, so the AR () is stationary. Moreover, the absolute value of MA parameter is less than as well; therefore, the MA () is invertible. Again, all the coefficients for the AR and MA in the mean equation are insignificant. However, we still leave them in the mean equation at this stage. All parameter estimates in the GARCH model are positive with volatility persistence estimated as = 0.995, very high and close to, indicating strong persistence in volatility and slow mean reversion. Low degrees of freedom (8.89) estimate indicating much fatter tails than a Gaussian. The standard deviation process seems nice and smooth, and sits nicely on the shoulder of the returns data below (shown in Figure 7). The standardized residuals aˆ Figure 7: Returns and its standard deviation remaining auto-correlation or obvious heteroskedasticity. t / ˆ σ, are plotted below (See Figure 8). The plots appear to show little t 9
11 Figure 8: Standardised rediduals and its ACF To confirm the observation in ACF plot, the LB test is conducted with outcomes summarized in the table below. The high p-value from the LB test shows that there is no remaining autocorrelation, at 5% significance level. So, it seems the mean equation is reasonably modelled well by ARMA (, ) even though their parameter estimates are insignificant. Table 5: LB test results (residuals) for ARMA-GARCH-t LB test: residuals m=0, d.f=5 m=5, d.f=0 p-value The histogram of these transformed standardized residuals is shown in Figure 9. The plot appears slightly more fat-tailed than a normal distribution, with one large negative outlier around -4. However, the QQ-plot does not depart much at all from normality in either upper or lower tail, which may seem that it is very close to a standard Gaussian. Figure 9: Histogram for standardised residual and its QQ plot The sample skewness and kurtosis are: and 3.00, which seem very close to the Gaussian distribution with 0 and 3, respectively. In addition, the JB test has the p-value of 0.5, thus cannot 0
12 reject the null hypothesis of Gaussian residuals. The model fits the data very well in the tails of the distribution. Figure 0: ACF for squared standardised residuals The squared transformed standardised residuals seem to display significant autocorrelation at the 3 th and the 6 th lag. We can further conduct the LB test to test the ARCH effect. The results for LB test are listed in the table below. The high p-value indicates that there are no clearly significant remaining ARCH effects in the data. It seems that the ARMA(,)-GARCH(,)-t model captures the volatility dynamics reasonably well. Table 6: LB test results (squared residuals) for ARMA-GARCH-t m=0, d.f=5 m=5, d.f=0 p-value In summary, the ARMA (, )-GARCH (, )-t model have reasonably well captured the mean, volatility and distribution processes of the Consumer returns. It cannot be clearly rejected on any of these three criteria or aspects ARMA-EGARCH-t In terms of the EGARCH model, we choose to fit the ARMA (, )-EGARCH (, )-t: r = r + 0. a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t t t t t t 9.40 (s.e)(0.023) (0.402) (0.406) log( σ ) = log( σ ) + 0.5( ε E( t )) 0.05ε 2 2 * t t t t- (s.e) (0.003) (0.004) (0.023) (0.04) The absolute value of AR parameter is less than, so the AR () is stationary. Moreover, the absolute value of MA parameter is less than as well; therefore, the MA () is invertible. Again, all the coefficients for the AR and MA in the mean equation are insignificant. However, we still leave them in the mean equation at this stage. Moreover, β =0.988 <, the stationarity requirement has
13 been fulfilled in the equation. Low degrees of freedom (9.4) estimate indicates much fatter tails than a Gaussian. The coefficients in the volatility equation are significant, particular with the significant leverage term. The NIC is plotted in Figure. The level of asymmetry is estimated as On average, the negative shocks of around 2 standard deviations have a 22.73% higher volatility than positive shocks of the same size. Figure : New information curve Figure 2: Volatility for ARCH, GARCH and EGARCH model As can be seen from the plot, the ARCH estimates are quite noisy and less smooth, compared to the other series. It gives higher volatility estimates than the other two models over time. On the contrary, the GARCH volatilities seem smoother than the ARCH estimated volatilities. The EARCH estimates provide the lowest volatility during the low volatility period (from the 20 th to the 600 th observation). During the high volatility period (around the 600 th observation), the GARCH estimates are higher than EARCH but lower than ARCH. The GARCH and EGARCH are almost on top of each other on most days. The GARCH volatilities recover the slowest from the GFC from 2008 (around the 600 th observation), as its volatility persistence is the highest among the three models. 2
14 3.2.4 Historical Simulation The final model applied is a non-parametric model, which is Historical Simulation with data from the last 00 days (HS-00), the equations are shown below: r r s r r ( ) t = t i σ t = (00) = t i (00) 00 i= 00 i= The sample mean of last 00 days are used when estimating the mean and standard deviation. The return and the standard deviation are expected to be smoother than other models, shown in Figure 3 and Figure Return HS-00 return Figure 3: Compare daily return and 00-day mean return HS Figure 4: Compare volatility among each model 3.3 Model Construction for the Other Industries Similar to fitting Consumer, we are using AIC and SIC to find the appropriate orders for AMRA and then to find the orders for ARCH and GARCH, and thereby to fit EGARCH. We are still using the Student-t distribution for characterizing the error terms. The equations of the fitted models for the other three industries are below. 3
15 Energy: ARMA(,)-ARCH()-t r = r 0.94 a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t t t t t t 8.54 (s.e)(0.0064) (0.055) (0.048) σ = a a + 0.6a a a t t t 2 t 3 t 4 t 5 (s.e) (0.074) ( 0.030) (0.029) (0.040) (0.034) (0.029) a a a a + 0.2a a t 6 t 7 t 8 t 9 t 0 t (0.038) (0.033) (0.025) (0.030) (0.038) (0.032) Energy: ARMA(,)-GARCH(,)-t r = r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t t t t t t 9.0 (s.e)(0.072) (0.47) (0.48) σ = a σ t t t (s.e) (0.005) (0.009) (0.0092) Energy: ARMA(,)-EGARCH(,0)-t r = r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t t t t t t 9.3 (s.e)(0.009) (0.093) (0.085) log( σ ) = log( σ ) + 0.2( ε E( t )) 0.02ε 2 2 * t t t- 9.3 t- (s.e) (0.003) (0.003) (0.02) (0.0) Financials: ARMA(2,)-ARCH(8)-t r = r 0.0r 0.76 a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t 2 t t t t t t 8.3 (s.e) (0.028) (0.54) (0.026) (0.54) Financials: ARMA(2,)-GARCH(,)-t r σ = a r+ 0.3a r+ 0.3a + a0.aa a a + 0.3at + 0.2a + 0.3a (s.e)(0.026) (0.025) (0.033) (0.47) (0.036) (0.027)(0.035) (0.47)(0.035) (0.033) (0.04) (0.039) (0.038) * 2 2 t t = t t 0.02 t 2 t t 3 t + t t4 t= σε tt 5t εt ~ t (0,) t 7 t 8 σ = a σ t t t (s.e) (0.002) (0.0) (0.02) 4
16 Financials: ARMA(2,)-EGARCH(,0)-t r = r r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t 2 t t t t t t 0.8 (s.e)(0.028) (0.607) (0.026) (0.607) * log( σ ) = log( σ ) ( ε E( t )) 0.44ε 2 2 t t t- 0.8 t- (s.e) (0.005) (0.005) (0.026) (0.06) Telecomm: ARMA(2,)-ARCH(7)-t r = r 0.039r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t 2 t t t t t t 6.2 (s.e)(0.06) (0.392) (0.027) (0.392) σ = a + 0.4a a a + 0.a t t t 2 t 3 t a a t 5 t 6 t 7 (s.e) (0.068) (0.047) (0.039) (0.039) (0.03) (0.038) (0.032) (0.036) Telecomm: ARMA(2,)-GARCH(,)-t r = r 0.047r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t 2 t t t t t t 6.38 (s.e)(0.07) (0.45) (0.023) (0.45) σ = a σ t t t (s.e) (0.006) (0.0) (0.0) Telecomm: ARMA(2,)-EGARCH(,0)-t r = r 0.043r a + a a = σε ε ~ t (0,) * t t t 2 t t t t t t 6.65 (s.e)(0.05) (0.44) (0.023) (0.44) log( σ ) = log( σ ) ( ε E( t )) 0.026ε 2 2 * t t t t- (s.e) (0.003) (0.004) (0.022) (0.04) In the mean equations, some of the AR and the MA coefficients are insignificant, but we still leave them in the mean equation at this stage. Also, all the absolute values of coefficients of the AR and the MA terms in each model are less than. So, the mean equations modelled in ARMA are stationary and invertible. In the volatility models, there are several insignificant parameters, such as the 5 th ARCH parameter for Energy. And, the absolute values of the all the parameters in each volatility equation are less than, which means the ARCH and GARCH models are stationary. The EGARCH models are also stationary, as the β are less than. On the other hand, some models volatility persistence can be 5
17 very close to. Among them, Financials has the highest volatility persistence (0.999) from its GARCH, while Telecomm has the lowest volatility persistence (0.723) from its ARCH. The low degrees of freedom estimates from each model indicate the fatter tail than a Gaussian. We then will test the models by conducting LB and JB tests. LB tests: H0: ρ = ρ2 =... = ρm = 0 HA:at least one of ρi 0 ( i=,2... m) JB tests: H0 :skewness=0 AND kurtosis=3 H A :the distribution is not Normal First, the summary of the tests for ARMA-ARCH-t models in each industries are shown in the tables below. Table 7: Diagnostic Test results of the ARMA-ARCH-t model ARMA(,)-ARCH()-t for Energy ARMA(2,)-ARCH(8)- t for Financials ARMA(2,)-ARCH(7)- t for Telecomm p-value of LB test: 0.07 (m=9, d.f=5) 0.08 (m=7, d.f=5) 0.06 (m=6, d.f=5) residuals 0.08 (m=24, d.f=0) 0.00 (m=22, d.f=0) 0.70 (m=2, d.f=0) p-value of JB test p-value of LB test: squared residuals (m=9, d.f=5) (m=7, d.f=5) (m=6, d.f=5) (m=24, d.f=0) (m=22, d.f=0) (m=2, d.f=0) The LB test results suggest that there are significant remaining autocorrelation effects in the mean equation of Energy, and some significant remaining ARCH effects in the volatility equation of Energy. Both the mean and volatility equation are not well modeled by the ARMA (, )-ARCH ()-t model for Energy. On the other hand, for Financials and Telecomm, the LB tests for the transformed residuals show that there may be little significant remaining autocorrelation in the mean equation. So, the mean equations are reasonably well-modeled by the ARMA for Financials and Telecomm. However, for Financials and Telecomm, the LB tests for the squared residuals suggest that there are clearly significant remaining ARCH effects in the data. It seems that the ARMA-ARCH-t models have not captured the volatility dynamics reasonably well. Furthermore, the JB tests confirm that the transformed standardized residuals are not a standard Gaussian, except for Financials. In summary, all the ARMA-ARCH-t models have not captured adequate ARCH effects. So we will try refining the models which have higher orders to capture adequate ARCH effects. In particular, for Energy, we will increase the orders in both ARMA and ARCH. 6
18 Table 8: Diagnostic Test results after Re-fitting ARMA-ARCH-t model ARMA(5,5)-ARCH(6)- t for Energy ARMA(2,)-ARCH(6)- t for Financials ARMA(2,)-ARCH(6)- t for Telecomm p-value of LB (m=32, d.f=5) (m=25, d.f=5) (m=25, d.f=5) test: residuals 0.00 (m=37, d.f=0) (m=30, d.f=0) (m=30, d.f=0) p-value of JB test p-value of LB (m=32, d.f=5) (m=25, d.f=5)) 0.00 (m=25, d.f=5) test: squared residuals 0.002(m=37, d.f=0) (m=30, d.f=0) (m=30, d.f=0) The above results show that the remaining autocorrelation effects and ARCH effects are still significant for Energy. For Financials and Telecomm, the models actually are becoming worse, by showing both remaining significant autocorrelation effects and ARCH effects. Also, the normality is still rejected for the transformed standardized residuals. We might need to explore a new suitable distribution that has fatter tails than student-t distribution to characterize to dynamics of the data. Hence, now it may be difficult to find better models by just adjusting the orders of ARMA and ARCH. As a result, we will still use the models as chosen by SIC. Secondly, the summary of the tests for ARMA-GARCH-t models in each industries are shown in the table below. Table 9: Diagnostic Test results of the ARMA-GARCH-t model ARMA(,)- ARMA(2,)- GARCH(,)-t for GARCH(,)-t for Energy Financials ARMA(2,)- GARCH(,)-t for Telecomm p-value of LB test: (m=0, d.f=5) (m=, d.f=5) (m=, d.f=5) residuals (m=5, d.f=0) (m=6, d.f=0) (m=6, d.f=0) p-value of JB test p-value of LB test: squared residuals (m=0, d.f=5) (m=, d.f=5) (m=, d.f=5) 0.07 (m=5, d.f=0) (m=6, d.f=0) (m=6, d.f=0) The LB tests for the transformed residuals show that there is almost no significant remaining autocorrelation in the mean equations of all the three industries, which are reasonably well-modeled by the ARMA. On the other hand, except for Financials, the LB tests for the squared residuals suggest that there are significant remaining ARCH effects in the data of Energy and Telecomm. It seems that the ARMA- GARCH-t models have not captured the volatility dynamics reasonably well. In addition, the JB tests suggest that the transformed standardized residuals for all the three industries are still not a standard Gaussian. 7
19 Therefore, we may try refining the models of Energy and Telecomm with higher orders in GARCH to capture adequate lagged volatilities. Table 0: Diagnostic Test results after Re-fitting ARMA-GARCH-t model ARMA(,)-GARCH(5,5)-t ARMA(2,)-ARCH(5,5)-t for Energy for Telecomm p-value of LB test: residuals (m=8, d.f=5) (m=9, d.f=5) 0.20 (m=23, d.f=0) 0.80 (m=24, d.f=0) p-value of JB test p-value of LB test: (m=8, d.f=5) (m=9, d.f=5) squared residuals 0.04(m=23, d.f=0) (m=24, d.f=0) The above results show that there are still remaining significant ARCH effects in the volatility equations. Also, the normality is rejected for the transformed standardized residuals. It may be difficult to find better models by just adjusting the orders of GARCH. As a result, we will still use the models as chosen by SIC. The Historical Simulation method for the other three industries: Energy: r r s Et ; = Et ; i σ Et ; = E(00) 00 i= Financials: r r s Ft ; = Ft ; i σ Ft ; = F(00) 00 i= Telecomm: r r s Tt ; = Tt ; i σtt ; = T(00) 00 i= 4. Forecast and Accuracy Measures In Section 3, we have discussed several asset return models. In this part, we are going to forecast asset returns and risks using these different models/methods. Firstly, we will forecast with fixed horizon and moving origin. In-sample size will increase by one and models will be re-estimated for every period we move forward. In addition, we will assess the forecasting accuracy measures, for forecasted returns and volatilities of the four sectors throughout the forecasting period. Secondly, multi-period (607-step-ahead) forecasts with fixed origin will be calculated and evaluated in order to construct portfolios in next section. Besides, we also generated five-step-ahead forecasts in order to construct sectors in next section, but we will not focus on analysis of these forecasts here. One industry will be analysed in details, and results of other industries will be presented. 8
20 4. Return Forecast and Accuracy 4.. One-Step-Ahead Return Forecast We will focus on Energy to analyse of one-step-ahead forecasted returns and accuracy measures. The following figure summarizes the dynamics of forecasted returns under the four models Energy Forecast Period Return ARMA-ARCH ARMA-GARCH ARMA-EGARCH HS(00) Figure 5 One-step-Forecasted Energy returns under four models versus actual returns As we can see from the plot, none of the forecasts seem to follow the directions or magnitudes of the actual Energy returns. This pattern is repeated for all the other industries, too Figure 6: First 25 one-step-ahead Forecasted Energy returns under four models versus actual returns Figure 6 shows more close characteristics of forecasted returns. The ARMA-ARCH forecasts (in + ), the ARMA-GARCH forecasts (in * ) and the ARMA-EGARCH forecasts (in diamonds) are on top of each other, while historical simulation (in triangle) forecasts are different from the ARMA- ARCH type models forecasts in directions in some occasions. However, none of the forecasts follows the magnitude or directions of actual data. To assess these forecasts numerically, we can calculate the RMSE and MAD of these forecasts, as shown in the following table. 9
21 Table: Accuracy Measures for one-step-ahead Forecasted daily Energy returns under four models ARMA(,)- ARMA(,)- ARMA(,)- HS-00 ARCH()-t GARCH(,)-t EGARCH(,)-t RMSE MAD The units of RMSE and MAD are the same units as percentage returns. The typical errors made are between.06% and.4% in terms of percentage returns. These seem large for daily return, which numerically explains why our forecasts do not follow the dynamics of real data. The best method, most accurate under both accuracy measures, is the ARMA-EGARCH-t model, followed by the ARMA-ARCH-t. The HS-00 ranks last under MAD while ARMA-GARCH-t ranks last under RMSE. As RMSE is sensitive to outliers, MAD is more trustworthy. 6 Energy 6 Financials Telecomms 3 Cons Staples Figure 7: one-step-ahead forecasted Portfolios returns under four models and actual returns The above figure summarizes the dynamics of forecasted returns of four portfolios under the four models. These forecasts are flat compared to real return data. In addition, forecasts of ARMA- ARCH type models are close to each other while HS-00 forecast somewhat deviates from them. However, none of the forecasts seem to follow the directions or magnitudes of the actual portfolio returns. This pattern is same for all the four portfolios. All portfolios RMSE and MAD are presented in the following table. The typical errors made are between 0.65% and.4% in terms of percentage returns. These errors are really large for daily returns. For Telecomm and Consumer, the best method is the ARMA-ARCH-t model. For Energy and Financials, the best method is the ARMA-EGARCH-t model and ARMA-GARCH-t respectively. The HS-00 ranks last under both MAD and RMSE for all portfolios. 20
22 Table 2: Accuracy Measures for one-step-ahead Forecasted daily Portfolio returns under four models ARMA- ARMA- ARMA- HS-00 ARCH GARCH EGARCH Energy RMSE MAD Financials RMSE MAD Telecomm RMSE MAD Consumer RMSE MAD Multi-period Return Forecast Multi-period return forecasts can also be calculated and evaluated. The following figure summarizes the 607 forecasts under four models for Energy. As we can see from the figure, return forecasts under the HS method are constant over the whole forecast period. For ARCH type models, ARMA- EGARCH-t forecast recover the quickest to its long run mean (constant coefficient of the mean equation). ARMA-GARCH-t comes second, and it bounces back and forth before recovery as the model has negative AR coefficient. ARMA-ARCH-t forecast recover the slowest. Besides, these multi-period forecasts are less volatile than one-step-ahead forecasts as they all recover to their long run mean. However, none of the forecasts matches the direction or magnitude of the real return data. 0.5 Multi-period Forecasts under 4 Models Percentage Return ARMA-ARCH ARMA-GARCH ARMA-EGARCH HS(00) Forecast Period Figure 8: 607-step-ahead Forecasted Energy returns under four models All portfolios RMSE and MAD for 607-step-ahead forecasts are presented in the following table. They can roughly be regarded as performance to predict long-run mean for each industry. The typical errors made are between 0.65% and.4% in terms of percentage returns. These errors are large and similar to the errors made from one-step-ahead forecasts. 2
23 In summary, as for Energy, the best method is the HS method and the worst are ARMA-ARCH-t and ARMA-GARCH-t, indicating the long-run mean for Energy return series is closer to the HS forecast. For Financials, the best method is ARMA-EGARCH and the worst is HS method.. For Telecomm, the best method is ARMA-GARCH-t and the worst is HS-00 method. For Consumer, the best method is ARMA-EGARCH-t and the worst is HS method. Table 3: 607-step-ahead Forecasted portfolio returns under four models ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS(00) Energy RMSE MAD Financials RMSE MAD Telecomm RMSE MAD Consumer RMSE MAD Volatility Forecast and Accuracy 4.2. One-Step-Ahead Volatility Forecast As volatility is an unobserved process, we need volatility proxies to assess volatility forecast accuracy. These proxies are stated as following. Proxy is the square mean-corrected daily return. Proxy 2 is the percentage log intra-day range. Proxy 3 is overnight-movement-adjusted log intra-day range. We will focus on Energy to analyse forecasted volatility and accuracy measures. Forecasted volatility for Energy versus Proxy is depicted in figure9. The Proxy volatilities are in green. The three GARCH type models forecasts seem mostly similar, and mostly to sit on top or on the shoulders of the absolute return shocks. This is what expected since the theoretical return shock under these models are less than the standard deviation as error term for expected to be less than for most of times. Therefore, the true volatility process should also sit on top of the absolute return shocks. The HS-00 takes the longest to recover from extreme returns, and its forecasted volatility is the smoothest. The ARCH forecasts are quite noisy and less smooth, compared to the other series. The ARCH () recovers after exactly days. The GARCH and EGARCH are on top of each other on most days. 22
24 6 5 4 Energy Proxy volatility ARMR-ARCH ARMR-GARCH ARMR-EARCH HS(00) Figure 9: Forecasted Portfolios volatilities under four models and Proxy Figure 20 is the forecasted volatility for Energy as well as Proxy 2. As we can see in the figure, this proxy does not have close-to-zero volatility estimates like Proxy. By using intra-day range data, the efficiency increase with this proxy which is never zero on a trading day. However, this proxy has completely missed the overnight price movements as intra-day range does not include overnight returns. Note that on Aug 5 20, Energy has dropped significantly by almost 6%, and the intra-day range was even bigger (more than 7%). Therefore, there is a sharp peaked volatility in the middle of the plot at around 400 days Energy Proxy 2 volatility ARMA-ARCH ARMA-GARCH ARMA-EGARCH HS(200) Figure 20: Forecasted Portfolios volatilities under four models and Proxy 2 Proxy 3, on the other hand, takes overnight returns into consideration. However, as closing prices close to opening price for the next day for these portfolio indices. Proxy 3 and Proxy 2 do not make much difference in this case. Figure2 shows Proxy 3 versus volatility forecasts is presented below. 23
25 Energy Proxy 3 Volatility ARMA-ARCH ARMA-GARCH ARMA-EGARCH HS(00) Figure 2: Forecasted Portfolios volatilities under four models and Proxy 3 As for volatility forecast accuracy, the following two tables present RMSE and MAD measures for Energy under four different models. Table 4: RMSE for one-step-ahead forecasted daily Energy volatilities under four models ARMA(,)-ARCH()-t ARMA(,)-GARCH(,)-t ARMA(,)-EGARCH(,0)-t HS-00 Proxy Proxy Proxy Table 5: MAD for one-step-ahead forecasted daily Energy volatilities under four models ARMA(,)-ARCH()-t ARMA(,)-GARCH(,)-t ARMA(,)-EGARCH(,0)-t HS-00 Proxy Proxy Proxy The typical errors made are between 0.5% and 0.94% in terms of percentage returns. They are less than the errors made in return forecast. For Proxy, the best method is the ARMA-EGARCH model. For Proxy 2 and 3, the best method is the ARMA-GARCH. The HS-00 ranks last for all proxies. Table 6: RMSE for one-step-ahead forecasted daily Portfolio volatilities under four models ARMA- ARMA- ARMA- HS(00) ARCH-t GARCH-t EGARCH-t Energy Proxy Proxy Proxy Financials Proxy Proxy Proxy Telecomm Proxy Proxy Proxy Consumer Proxy Proxy Proxy
26 Table 7: MAD for one-step-ahead forecasted daily Portfolio volatilities under four models ARMA- ARMA- ARMA- HS(00) ARCH-t GARCH-t EGARCH-t Energy Proxy Proxy Proxy Financials Proxy Proxy Proxy Telecomm Proxy Proxy Proxy Consumer Proxy Proxy Proxy All industries RMSE and MAD for volatility forecast are presented in the above tables. For Telecomm and Financials, the best method is the ARMA-EGARCH-t model and the worst is HS for most proxies. For Consumer, the best method is the ARMA-GARCH-t model and the worst is ARMA-ARCH-t Multi-period Volatility Forecast Multi-period return forecasts can also be calculated and evaluated. The following figure summarizes the 607 forecasts under four models for Energy. As we can see from the figure, volatility forecast under HS method is constant over whole forecast period. As for ARMA-ARCH type models. ARMA-ARCH forecasts recover quickest. ARMA-EGARCH comes second. And ARMA-GARCH forecasts recover slowest, as the model is the most volatility-persistent for Energy Multi-period Volatility Forecasts under 4 Models ARMA-ARCH ARMA-GARCH ARMA-EGARCH HS(00) Figure 22: 607-step-ahead Energy Volatility Forecasts under four models 25
27 Table 8: RMSE for 607-step-ahead forecasted daily Portfolio volatilities under four models ARMA- ARMA- ARMA- HS-00 ARCH-t GARCH-t EGARCH-t Energy Proxy Proxy Proxy Financials Proxy Proxy Proxy Telecomm Proxy Proxy Proxy Consumer Proxy Proxy Proxy Table 9: MAD for 607-step-ahead forecasted daily Portfolio volatilities under four models ARMA- ARMA- ARMA- HS-00 ARCH-t GARCH-t EGARCH-t Energy Proxy Proxy Proxy Financials Proxy Proxy Proxy Telecomm Proxy Proxy Proxy Consumer Proxy Proxy Proxy All portfolios RMSE and MAD for volatility forecast are presented in the above tables. The errors made are ranged from 0.26% to.8% in terms of percentage returns. They are bigger than errors made in one-step-ahead forecast. For Consumer, Telecomm and Financials, the best method is the ARMA-EGARCH-t model and the worst is ARMA-ARCH-t for all proxies. However, for Energy, the best method is the HS method and the worst is ARMA-ARCH-t. ARMA-ARCH-t model forecasts deviate from the true volatility series most, while EGARCH and HS forecasts are closer to true volatility series. 4.3 VaR Forecast and Accuracy 4.3. One-step ahead forecast of VaR 26
28 As described above, each model is re-estimated every period with moving origin and fixed horizon. Figure 23 shows the forecast and accuracy of VaR under four models. The Energy industry will be evaluated in detail as indication. Figure 23: VaR at 5% for Energy The plot above shows the forecasted VaR for Energy sector over the whole forecast period. As can be seen from the plot, especially the circled area, the HS-00 estimates staying at a low level for 99 days after extreme shocks and located far away from the data in those periods. The ARCH, GARCH and EGARCH are on top of each other on most days. However, the ARCH moves back closer to the returns after extreme shocks, as pointed out with purple arrows. Figure 24: Violation at 5% for Energy The plot above shows the violations from the VaR forecast at 5%. As can be seen from the table, most of the returns violate all the models forecasts. However, the forecast under ARCH model has a few more violations as circled in purple. It seems there are more violations under low volatility period under each model. Table 20: Accuracy Test for Energy (-step) Energy ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value
29 The table above shows the violation rates and the tests results for each model. The ARCH and GARCH have the violation rate within the confidence interval and not significantly different to In addition, the ARCH is the only model over-estimates the risk level, with less violations and violation rates significantly less than All other models are under-estimate the risk level. In terms of the GARCH, it has the lowest loss function value, which indicates that the model forecasts are closest to the true VaR levels. Moreover, it has also passed the independence test, indicating that it has tracked the dynamic risk well. The EGARCH shows the largest number of violations, and it gives the second largest loss function value as well as a p-value of zero for DQ test. Therefore, the EGARCH has not tracked the dynamic risk well. As for the Historical Simulation model, it has passed the independence test, with a p-value of 0.2. However, it might also not track the dynamic risk well since it has the largest loss function value and a p-value of zero from DQ test. Actually, no model could pass the DQ test. Table 2: Accuracy Test for Financials (-step) Financials ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value Table 22: Accuracy Test for Telecomm (-step) Telecomm ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value Table 23: Accuracy Test for Consumer (-step) Consumer ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value
30 The three tables above show the violation rates and tests results for each industry. As for Financial industry, the ARMA-EGARCH-t model perform the best, it has the violation rates closest to the 5% expected level. In addition, it captures the dynamic risk as it passed the independence and DQ test as well as providing the lowest loss function value. In terms of Telecomm, the ARMA-EGARCH-t method has the violation rate closest to the expected level; however, the ARMA-ARCH-t model forecasts are closest to the true VaR levels as it shows the lowest loss function value. As for Consumer, the ARMA-EGARCH-t model also performs the best as it has the lowest loss function value as well as providing the violation rates that close to the expected violation rate level Multi-step ahead forecast of VaR As the multi-step ahead forecast is used when allocating fixed portfolio weights, the volatility tends to its long run mean. In turn, the Value at Risk also tends to smooth over time. The plot below shows the smoothed VaR with 5% violation rate. Figure 23: VaR at 5% for Energy Figure 24: Violation at 5% for Energy 29
31 According to Figure 23 and 24, the ARMA-EGARCH-t model and HS-00 method forecasts have few more violations over the period, especially during the high volatility period. The ARMA- ARCH-t model lies under all other models in the first plot, and therefore, it provides the least number of violations, which can be verified in the table below. Table 24: Accuracy Test for Energy (multi-step) Energy ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value As can be seen from the table above, the ARMA-ARCH model provides the violation rate of 0.038, which is within the confidence interval. However, it over-estimated the risk level, as it has fewer amounts of violations than expected. All other models under-estimates the level of risk. The ARMA- GARCH has the lowest loss function value; therefore, the ARMA-GARCH model forecasts are closest to the true VaR. As for ARMA-EGARCH and HS-00 model, they perform the worst, as they provides far more violations than expected and has the highest loss function values than other models. Other Models: Table 25: Accuracy Test for Financials (multi-step) Financial ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCHt- HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value Table 26: Accuracy Test for Telecomm (multi-step) Telecomm ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value
32 Table 27: Accuracy Test for Consumer (multi-step) Consumer ARMA-ARCH-t ARMA-GARCH-t ARMA-EGARCH-t HS-00 Number of Violations ! !/! Confidence Interval (0.0327,0.0673) Independence Test DQ Test Loss Function Value Based on the three tables above, the ARMA-GARCH-t model performs the best as it provides the closest number of violations to the expectation (30.35) and the second lowest loss function value. The HS-00 method has the lowest loss function value, which means the forecasts are closest to the true VaR. As for Telecomm and Consumer, the ARMA-EGARCH-t model performs the best as it provides both the closest amount of violations to expectation and the lowest loss function values. 5. Optimal Portfolio Allocation In this section, we are trying to find an optimal portfolio allocation method using forecasts, and try to perform better than equally-weighted portfolio that is often very hard to beat in real data. Three strategies will be employed and generated forecasts will assist our portfolio allocation. Performance will be assessed using actual data over the whole forecast period with three criteria, average return of portfolios, standard deviation of portfolios and Utility Scores of portfolios. 5. Portfolio Allocation Methods In our portfolio allocation, three different rules are applied when choosing the optimal portfolio weights, which are: Return Strategy, Volatility Strategy and VaR Strategy. As for Return Strategy, which is the most aggressive rule, weights are allocated based on their forecasted returns. That is, higher portfolio weights are allocated on asset with higher forecasted returns as higher return represents higher utility for investors. In terms of Volatility Strategy, it is more conservative than the Return Strategy as it takes asset volatility or risk into consideration. Under this strategy, higher portfolio weights are allocated on asset with lower forecasted volatilities. The rationale behind this allocation method is that investors are risk averse and prefer lower volatility. The VaR measures the quantiles of returns, which shows the minimum amount of loss of a portfolio under normal market condition during a period with a certain probability level (Jorion 200). Under this strategy, higher portfolio weights are allocated on asset with lower forecasted VaR which is one 3
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2010, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2010, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Midterm Problem A: (30 pts) Answer briefly the following questions. Each question has
More informationGARCH Models. Instructor: G. William Schwert
APS 425 Fall 2015 GARCH Models Instructor: G. William Schwert 585-275-2470 schwert@schwert.ssb.rochester.edu Autocorrelated Heteroskedasticity Suppose you have regression residuals Mean = 0, not autocorrelated
More informationBooth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2016, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2016, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Midterm Problem A: (30 pts) Answer briefly the following questions. Each question has
More informationResearch Article The Volatility of the Index of Shanghai Stock Market Research Based on ARCH and Its Extended Forms
Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society Volume 2009, Article ID 743685, 9 pages doi:10.1155/2009/743685 Research Article The Volatility of the Index of Shanghai Stock Market Research Based on ARCH and
More informationBooth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2014, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2014, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Midterm Problem A: (30 pts) Answer briefly the following questions. Each question has
More informationAmath 546/Econ 589 Univariate GARCH Models: Advanced Topics
Amath 546/Econ 589 Univariate GARCH Models: Advanced Topics Eric Zivot April 29, 2013 Lecture Outline The Leverage Effect Asymmetric GARCH Models Forecasts from Asymmetric GARCH Models GARCH Models with
More informationIndian Institute of Management Calcutta. Working Paper Series. WPS No. 797 March Implied Volatility and Predictability of GARCH Models
Indian Institute of Management Calcutta Working Paper Series WPS No. 797 March 2017 Implied Volatility and Predictability of GARCH Models Vivek Rajvanshi Assistant Professor, Indian Institute of Management
More information1 Volatility Definition and Estimation
1 Volatility Definition and Estimation 1.1 WHAT IS VOLATILITY? It is useful to start with an explanation of what volatility is, at least for the purpose of clarifying the scope of this book. Volatility
More informationChapter 4 Level of Volatility in the Indian Stock Market
Chapter 4 Level of Volatility in the Indian Stock Market Measurement of volatility is an important issue in financial econometrics. The main reason for the prominent role that volatility plays in financial
More informationVolatility Clustering of Fine Wine Prices assuming Different Distributions
Volatility Clustering of Fine Wine Prices assuming Different Distributions Cynthia Royal Tori, PhD Valdosta State University Langdale College of Business 1500 N. Patterson Street, Valdosta, GA USA 31698
More informationFinancial Econometrics
Financial Econometrics Volatility Gerald P. Dwyer Trinity College, Dublin January 2013 GPD (TCD) Volatility 01/13 1 / 37 Squared log returns for CRSP daily GPD (TCD) Volatility 01/13 2 / 37 Absolute value
More informationThe Analysis of ICBC Stock Based on ARMA-GARCH Model
Volume 04 - Issue 08 August 2018 PP. 11-16 The Analysis of ICBC Stock Based on ARMA-GARCH Model Si-qin LIU 1 Hong-guo SUN 1* 1 (Department of Mathematics and Finance Hunan University of Humanities Science
More informationThe University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2009, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Final Exam
The University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2009, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Final Exam Problem A: (42 pts) Answer briefly the following questions. 1. Questions
More informationModeling Volatility of Price of Some Selected Agricultural Products in Ethiopia: ARIMA-GARCH Applications
Modeling Volatility of Price of Some Selected Agricultural Products in Ethiopia: ARIMA-GARCH Applications Background: Agricultural products market policies in Ethiopia have undergone dramatic changes over
More informationThe Great Moderation Flattens Fat Tails: Disappearing Leptokurtosis
The Great Moderation Flattens Fat Tails: Disappearing Leptokurtosis WenShwo Fang Department of Economics Feng Chia University 100 WenHwa Road, Taichung, TAIWAN Stephen M. Miller* College of Business University
More informationModeling Exchange Rate Volatility using APARCH Models
96 TUTA/IOE/PCU Journal of the Institute of Engineering, 2018, 14(1): 96-106 TUTA/IOE/PCU Printed in Nepal Carolyn Ogutu 1, Betuel Canhanga 2, Pitos Biganda 3 1 School of Mathematics, University of Nairobi,
More informationAsymmetric Price Transmission: A Copula Approach
Asymmetric Price Transmission: A Copula Approach Feng Qiu University of Alberta Barry Goodwin North Carolina State University August, 212 Prepared for the AAEA meeting in Seattle Outline Asymmetric price
More informationLecture 5a: ARCH Models
Lecture 5a: ARCH Models 1 2 Big Picture 1. We use ARMA model for the conditional mean 2. We use ARCH model for the conditional variance 3. ARMA and ARCH model can be used together to describe both conditional
More informationAn Empirical Research on Chinese Stock Market Volatility Based. on Garch
Volume 04 - Issue 07 July 2018 PP. 15-23 An Empirical Research on Chinese Stock Market Volatility Based on Garch Ya Qian Zhu 1, Wen huili* 1 (Department of Mathematics and Finance, Hunan University of
More informationTHE INFORMATION CONTENT OF IMPLIED VOLATILITY IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY MARKETS. Pierre Giot 1
THE INFORMATION CONTENT OF IMPLIED VOLATILITY IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY MARKETS Pierre Giot 1 May 2002 Abstract In this paper we compare the incremental information content of lagged implied volatility
More informationDoes the interest rate for business loans respond asymmetrically to changes in the cash rate?
University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Commerce - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Business 2013 Does the interest rate for business loans respond asymmetrically to changes in the cash rate? Abbas
More informationChapter 6 Forecasting Volatility using Stochastic Volatility Model
Chapter 6 Forecasting Volatility using Stochastic Volatility Model Chapter 6 Forecasting Volatility using SV Model In this chapter, the empirical performance of GARCH(1,1), GARCH-KF and SV models from
More informationLecture 6: Non Normal Distributions
Lecture 6: Non Normal Distributions and their Uses in GARCH Modelling Prof. Massimo Guidolin 20192 Financial Econometrics Spring 2015 Overview Non-normalities in (standardized) residuals from asset return
More informationPredicting Inflation without Predictive Regressions
Predicting Inflation without Predictive Regressions Liuren Wu Baruch College, City University of New York Joint work with Jian Hua 6th Annual Conference of the Society for Financial Econometrics June 12-14,
More informationForecasting Volatility in the Chinese Stock Market under Model Uncertainty 1
Forecasting Volatility in the Chinese Stock Market under Model Uncertainty 1 Yong Li 1, Wei-Ping Huang, Jie Zhang 3 (1,. Sun Yat-Sen University Business, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 51075,China)
More informationImplied Volatility v/s Realized Volatility: A Forecasting Dimension
4 Implied Volatility v/s Realized Volatility: A Forecasting Dimension 4.1 Introduction Modelling and predicting financial market volatility has played an important role for market participants as it enables
More informationTime series analysis on return of spot gold price
Time series analysis on return of spot gold price Team member: Tian Xie (#1371992) Zizhen Li(#1368493) Contents Exploratory Analysis... 2 Data description... 2 Data preparation... 2 Basics Stats... 2 Unit
More informationBooth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2012, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2012, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Midterm Problem A: (34 pts) Answer briefly the following questions. Each question has
More informationFinancial Econometrics Jeffrey R. Russell. Midterm 2014 Suggested Solutions. TA: B. B. Deng
Financial Econometrics Jeffrey R. Russell Midterm 2014 Suggested Solutions TA: B. B. Deng Unless otherwise stated, e t is iid N(0,s 2 ) 1. (12 points) Consider the three series y1, y2, y3, and y4. Match
More informationGraduate School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2007, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Midterm
Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2007, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Midterm GSB Honor Code: I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this examination.
More informationValue at risk might underestimate risk when risk bites. Just bootstrap it!
23 September 215 by Zhili Cao Research & Investment Strategy at risk might underestimate risk when risk bites. Just bootstrap it! Key points at Risk (VaR) is one of the most widely used statistical tools
More informationVOLATILITY. Time Varying Volatility
VOLATILITY Time Varying Volatility CONDITIONAL VOLATILITY IS THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF the unpredictable part of the series. We define the conditional variance as: 2 2 2 t E yt E yt Ft Ft E t Ft surprise
More informationForecasting the Volatility in Financial Assets using Conditional Variance Models
LUND UNIVERSITY MASTER S THESIS Forecasting the Volatility in Financial Assets using Conditional Variance Models Authors: Hugo Hultman Jesper Swanson Supervisor: Dag Rydorff DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS SEMINAR
More informationLinda Allen, Jacob Boudoukh and Anthony Saunders, Understanding Market, Credit and Operational Risk: The Value at Risk Approach
P1.T4. Valuation & Risk Models Linda Allen, Jacob Boudoukh and Anthony Saunders, Understanding Market, Credit and Operational Risk: The Value at Risk Approach Bionic Turtle FRM Study Notes Reading 26 By
More informationThe University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2012, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Final Exam
The University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2012, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Final Exam Problem A: (40 points) Answer briefly the following questions. 1. Consider
More informationAn Empirical Analysis of Effect on Copper Futures Yield. Based on GARCH
An Empirical Analysis of Effect on Copper Futures Yield Based on GARCH Feng Li 1, Ping Xiao 2 * 1 (School of Hunan University of Humanities, Science and Technology, Hunan 417000, China) 2 (School of Hunan
More informationThe University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2010, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Final Exam
The University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 410, Spring Quarter 010, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Final Exam Problem A: (4 pts) Answer briefly the following questions. 1. Questions 1
More informationStatistical Analysis of Data from the Stock Markets. UiO-STK4510 Autumn 2015
Statistical Analysis of Data from the Stock Markets UiO-STK4510 Autumn 2015 Sampling Conventions We observe the price process S of some stock (or stock index) at times ft i g i=0,...,n, we denote it by
More informationFinancial Time Series Analysis (FTSA)
Financial Time Series Analysis (FTSA) Lecture 6: Conditional Heteroscedastic Models Few models are capable of generating the type of ARCH one sees in the data.... Most of these studies are best summarized
More informationARCH and GARCH models
ARCH and GARCH models Fulvio Corsi SNS Pisa 5 Dic 2011 Fulvio Corsi ARCH and () GARCH models SNS Pisa 5 Dic 2011 1 / 21 Asset prices S&P 500 index from 1982 to 2009 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200
More informationJaime Frade Dr. Niu Interest rate modeling
Interest rate modeling Abstract In this paper, three models were used to forecast short term interest rates for the 3 month LIBOR. Each of the models, regression time series, GARCH, and Cox, Ingersoll,
More informationData Distributions and Normality
Data Distributions and Normality Definition (Non)Parametric Parametric statistics assume that data come from a normal distribution, and make inferences about parameters of that distribution. These statistical
More informationBasic Procedure for Histograms
Basic Procedure for Histograms 1. Compute the range of observations (min. & max. value) 2. Choose an initial # of classes (most likely based on the range of values, try and find a number of classes that
More informationstarting on 5/1/1953 up until 2/1/2017.
An Actuary s Guide to Financial Applications: Examples with EViews By William Bourgeois An actuary is a business professional who uses statistics to determine and analyze risks for companies. In this guide,
More informationModeling the volatility of FTSE All Share Index Returns
MPRA Munich Personal RePEc Archive Modeling the volatility of FTSE All Share Index Returns Bayraci, Selcuk University of Exeter, Yeditepe University 27. April 2007 Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/28095/
More informationCross-Sectional Distribution of GARCH Coefficients across S&P 500 Constituents : Time-Variation over the Period
Cahier de recherche/working Paper 13-13 Cross-Sectional Distribution of GARCH Coefficients across S&P 500 Constituents : Time-Variation over the Period 2000-2012 David Ardia Lennart F. Hoogerheide Mai/May
More informationChapter IV. Forecasting Daily and Weekly Stock Returns
Forecasting Daily and Weekly Stock Returns An unsophisticated forecaster uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts -for support rather than for illumination.0 Introduction In the previous chapter,
More informationThe University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2017, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Solutions to Final Exam
The University of Chicago, Booth School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2017, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Solutions to Final Exam Problem A: (40 points) Answer briefly the following questions. 1. Describe
More informationINFORMATION EFFICIENCY HYPOTHESIS THE FINANCIAL VOLATILITY IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC CASE
INFORMATION EFFICIENCY HYPOTHESIS THE FINANCIAL VOLATILITY IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC CASE Abstract Petr Makovský If there is any market which is said to be effective, this is the the FOREX market. Here we
More informationOvernight Index Rate: Model, calibration and simulation
Research Article Overnight Index Rate: Model, calibration and simulation Olga Yashkir and Yuri Yashkir Cogent Economics & Finance (2014), 2: 936955 Page 1 of 11 Research Article Overnight Index Rate: Model,
More informationAbsolute Return Volatility. JOHN COTTER* University College Dublin
Absolute Return Volatility JOHN COTTER* University College Dublin Address for Correspondence: Dr. John Cotter, Director of the Centre for Financial Markets, Department of Banking and Finance, University
More informationComputer Lab Session 2 ARIMA, ARCH and GARCH Models
JBS Advanced Quantitative Research Methods Module MPO-1A Lent 2010 Thilo Klein http://thiloklein.de Contents Computer Lab Session 2 ARIMA, ARCH and GARCH Models Exercise 1. Estimation of a quarterly ARMA
More informationBooth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2013, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2013, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Midterm ChicagoBooth Honor Code: I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this
More informationFinancial Econometrics Jeffrey R. Russell Midterm 2014
Name: Financial Econometrics Jeffrey R. Russell Midterm 2014 You have 2 hours to complete the exam. Use can use a calculator and one side of an 8.5x11 cheat sheet. Try to fit all your work in the space
More informationVolatility Analysis of Nepalese Stock Market
The Journal of Nepalese Business Studies Vol. V No. 1 Dec. 008 Volatility Analysis of Nepalese Stock Market Surya Bahadur G.C. Abstract Modeling and forecasting volatility of capital markets has been important
More informationProperties of the estimated five-factor model
Informationin(andnotin)thetermstructure Appendix. Additional results Greg Duffee Johns Hopkins This draft: October 8, Properties of the estimated five-factor model No stationary term structure model is
More informationFINANCIAL ECONOMETRICS AND EMPIRICAL FINANCE MODULE 2
MSc. Finance/CLEFIN 2017/2018 Edition FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICS AND EMPIRICAL FINANCE MODULE 2 Midterm Exam Solutions June 2018 Time Allowed: 1 hour and 15 minutes Please answer all the questions by writing
More informationI. Return Calculations (20 pts, 4 points each)
University of Washington Winter 015 Department of Economics Eric Zivot Econ 44 Midterm Exam Solutions This is a closed book and closed note exam. However, you are allowed one page of notes (8.5 by 11 or
More informationForecasting Stock Index Futures Price Volatility: Linear vs. Nonlinear Models
The Financial Review 37 (2002) 93--104 Forecasting Stock Index Futures Price Volatility: Linear vs. Nonlinear Models Mohammad Najand Old Dominion University Abstract The study examines the relative ability
More informationMEASURING PORTFOLIO RISKS USING CONDITIONAL COPULA-AR-GARCH MODEL
MEASURING PORTFOLIO RISKS USING CONDITIONAL COPULA-AR-GARCH MODEL Isariya Suttakulpiboon MSc in Risk Management and Insurance Georgia State University, 30303 Atlanta, Georgia Email: suttakul.i@gmail.com,
More informationModelling Inflation Uncertainty Using EGARCH: An Application to Turkey
Modelling Inflation Uncertainty Using EGARCH: An Application to Turkey By Hakan Berument, Kivilcim Metin-Ozcan and Bilin Neyapti * Bilkent University, Department of Economics 06533 Bilkent Ankara, Turkey
More informationThe Variability of IPO Initial Returns
The Variability of IPO Initial Returns Journal of Finance 65 (April 2010) 425-465 Michelle Lowry, Micah Officer, and G. William Schwert Interesting blend of time series and cross sectional modeling issues
More informationBooth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2012, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2012, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Midterm ChicagoBooth Honor Code: I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this
More informationA Comparative Study of Various Forecasting Techniques in Predicting. BSE S&P Sensex
NavaJyoti, International Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Research Volume 1, Issue 1, August 2016 A Comparative Study of Various Forecasting Techniques in Predicting BSE S&P Sensex Dr. Jahnavi M 1 Assistant
More informationProperties of financail time series GARCH(p,q) models Risk premium and ARCH-M models Leverage effects and asymmetric GARCH models.
5 III Properties of financail time series GARCH(p,q) models Risk premium and ARCH-M models Leverage effects and asymmetric GARCH models 1 ARCH: Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity Conditional
More informationLONG MEMORY IN VOLATILITY
LONG MEMORY IN VOLATILITY How persistent is volatility? In other words, how quickly do financial markets forget large volatility shocks? Figure 1.1, Shephard (attached) shows that daily squared returns
More informationModelling Stock Market Return Volatility: Evidence from India
Modelling Stock Market Return Volatility: Evidence from India Saurabh Singh Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Business,Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore 452001 (M.P.) India Dr. L.K Tripathi Dean,
More informationConditional Heteroscedasticity
1 Conditional Heteroscedasticity May 30, 2010 Junhui Qian 1 Introduction ARMA(p,q) models dictate that the conditional mean of a time series depends on past observations of the time series and the past
More informationMarket Risk Management for Financial Institutions Based on GARCH Family Models
Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Arts & Sciences Electronic Theses and Dissertations Arts & Sciences Spring 5-2017 Market Risk Management for Financial Institutions
More informationTHE DYNAMICS OF PRECIOUS METAL MARKETS VAR: A GARCH-TYPE APPROACH. Yue Liang Master of Science in Finance, Simon Fraser University, 2018.
THE DYNAMICS OF PRECIOUS METAL MARKETS VAR: A GARCH-TYPE APPROACH by Yue Liang Master of Science in Finance, Simon Fraser University, 2018 and Wenrui Huang Master of Science in Finance, Simon Fraser University,
More informationVolatility in the Indian Financial Market Before, During and After the Global Financial Crisis
Volatility in the Indian Financial Market Before, During and After the Global Financial Crisis Praveen Kulshreshtha Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, India Aakriti Mittal Indian Institute of Technology
More informationINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH IN ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IJARET)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH IN ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (IJARET) ISSN 0976-6480 (Print) ISSN 0976-6499 (Online) Volume 5, Issue 3, March (204), pp. 73-82 IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijaret.asp
More informationChapter 11: Inference for Distributions Inference for Means of a Population 11.2 Comparing Two Means
Chapter 11: Inference for Distributions 11.1 Inference for Means of a Population 11.2 Comparing Two Means 1 Population Standard Deviation In the previous chapter, we computed confidence intervals and performed
More informationA gentle introduction to the RM 2006 methodology
A gentle introduction to the RM 2006 methodology Gilles Zumbach RiskMetrics Group Av. des Morgines 12 1213 Petit-Lancy Geneva, Switzerland gilles.zumbach@riskmetrics.com Initial version: August 2006 This
More informationGARCH vs. Traditional Methods of Estimating Value-at-Risk (VaR) of the Philippine Bond Market
GARCH vs. Traditional Methods of Estimating Value-at-Risk (VaR) of the Philippine Bond Market INTRODUCTION Value-at-Risk (VaR) Value-at-Risk (VaR) summarizes the worst loss over a target horizon that
More informationApplication of Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk Model to Kenyan Stocks: A Comparative Study
American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics 2017; 6(3): 150-155 http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/j/ajtas doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20170603.13 ISSN: 2326-8999 (Print); ISSN: 2326-9006 (Online)
More informationBayesian Estimation of the Markov-Switching GARCH(1,1) Model with Student-t Innovations
Bayesian Estimation of the Markov-Switching GARCH(1,1) Model with Student-t Innovations Department of Quantitative Economics, Switzerland david.ardia@unifr.ch R/Rmetrics User and Developer Workshop, Meielisalp,
More informationSTAT758. Final Project. Time series analysis of daily exchange rate between the British Pound and the. US dollar (GBP/USD)
STAT758 Final Project Time series analysis of daily exchange rate between the British Pound and the US dollar (GBP/USD) Theophilus Djanie and Harry Dick Thompson UNR May 14, 2012 INTRODUCTION Time Series
More informationTHE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO Graduate School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2003, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO Graduate School of Business Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2003, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Homework Assignment #2 Solution April 25, 2003 Each HW problem is 10 points throughout this quarter.
More informationWeb Appendix. Are the effects of monetary policy shocks big or small? Olivier Coibion
Web Appendix Are the effects of monetary policy shocks big or small? Olivier Coibion Appendix 1: Description of the Model-Averaging Procedure This section describes the model-averaging procedure used in
More informationAre Market Neutral Hedge Funds Really Market Neutral?
Are Market Neutral Hedge Funds Really Market Neutral? Andrew Patton London School of Economics June 2005 1 Background The hedge fund industry has grown from about $50 billion in 1990 to $1 trillion in
More informationMODELING EXCHANGE RATE VOLATILITY OF UZBEK SUM BY USING ARCH FAMILY MODELS
International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management United Kingdom Vol. VI, Issue 11, November 2018 http://ijecm.co.uk/ ISSN 2348 0386 MODELING EXCHANGE RATE VOLATILITY OF UZBEK SUM BY USING ARCH
More informationThis homework assignment uses the material on pages ( A moving average ).
Module 2: Time series concepts HW Homework assignment: equally weighted moving average This homework assignment uses the material on pages 14-15 ( A moving average ). 2 Let Y t = 1/5 ( t + t-1 + t-2 +
More informationPrerequisites for modeling price and return data series for the Bucharest Stock Exchange
Theoretical and Applied Economics Volume XX (2013), No. 11(588), pp. 117-126 Prerequisites for modeling price and return data series for the Bucharest Stock Exchange Andrei TINCA The Bucharest University
More informationForecasting Volatility of USD/MUR Exchange Rate using a GARCH (1,1) model with GED and Student s-t errors
UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS RESEARCH JOURNAL Volume 17 2011 University of Mauritius, Réduit, Mauritius Research Week 2009/2010 Forecasting Volatility of USD/MUR Exchange Rate using a GARCH (1,1) model with
More informationFinancial Econometrics (FinMetrics04) Time-series Statistics Concepts Exploratory Data Analysis Testing for Normality Empirical VaR
Financial Econometrics (FinMetrics04) Time-series Statistics Concepts Exploratory Data Analysis Testing for Normality Empirical VaR Nelson Mark University of Notre Dame Fall 2017 September 11, 2017 Introduction
More informationThe Characteristics of Stock Market Volatility. By Daniel R Wessels. June 2006
The Characteristics of Stock Market Volatility By Daniel R Wessels June 2006 Available at: www.indexinvestor.co.za 1. Introduction Stock market volatility is synonymous with the uncertainty how macroeconomic
More informationBooth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2016, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay. Midterm
Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Business 41202, Spring Quarter 2016, Mr. Ruey S. Tsay Midterm ChicagoBooth Honor Code: I pledge my honor that I have not violated the Honor Code during this
More informationUniversity of New South Wales Semester 1, Economics 4201 and Homework #2 Due on Tuesday 3/29 (20% penalty per day late)
University of New South Wales Semester 1, 2011 School of Economics James Morley 1. Autoregressive Processes (15 points) Economics 4201 and 6203 Homework #2 Due on Tuesday 3/29 (20 penalty per day late)
More informationEmpirical Study on Short-Term Prediction of Shanghai Composite Index Based on ARMA Model
Empirical Study on Short-Term Prediction of Shanghai Composite Index Based on ARMA Model Cai-xia Xiang 1, Ping Xiao 2* 1 (School of Hunan University of Humanities, Science and Technology, Hunan417000,
More informationSumra Abbas. Dr. Attiya Yasmin Javed
Sumra Abbas Dr. Attiya Yasmin Javed Calendar Anomalies Seasonality: systematic variation in time series that happens after certain time period within a year: Monthly effect Day of week Effect Turn of Year
More informationSTOCK MARKET EFFICIENCY, NON-LINEARITY AND THIN TRADING EFFECTS IN SOME SELECTED COMPANIES IN GHANA
STOCK MARKET EFFICIENCY, NON-LINEARITY AND THIN TRADING Abstract EFFECTS IN SOME SELECTED COMPANIES IN GHANA Wiredu Sampson *, Atopeo Apuri Benjamin and Allotey Robert Nii Ampah Department of Statistics,
More informationMeasuring and Interpreting core inflation: evidence from Italy
11 th Measuring and Interpreting core inflation: evidence from Italy Biggeri L*., Laureti T and Polidoro F*. *Italian National Statistical Institute (Istat), Rome, Italy; University of Naples Parthenope,
More informationFinal Exam Suggested Solutions
University of Washington Fall 003 Department of Economics Eric Zivot Economics 483 Final Exam Suggested Solutions This is a closed book and closed note exam. However, you are allowed one page of handwritten
More informationAmath 546/Econ 589 Univariate GARCH Models
Amath 546/Econ 589 Univariate GARCH Models Eric Zivot April 24, 2013 Lecture Outline Conditional vs. Unconditional Risk Measures Empirical regularities of asset returns Engle s ARCH model Testing for ARCH
More informationThe distribution of the Return on Capital Employed (ROCE)
Appendix A The historical distribution of Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) was studied between 2003 and 2012 for a sample of Italian firms with revenues between euro 10 million and euro 50 million. 1
More informationA Study of Stock Return Distributions of Leading Indian Bank s
Global Journal of Management and Business Studies. ISSN 2248-9878 Volume 3, Number 3 (2013), pp. 271-276 Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com/gjmbs.htm A Study of Stock Return Distributions
More informationIS INFLATION VOLATILITY CORRELATED FOR THE US AND CANADA?
IS INFLATION VOLATILITY CORRELATED FOR THE US AND CANADA? C. Barry Pfitzner, Department of Economics/Business, Randolph-Macon College, Ashland, VA, bpfitzne@rmc.edu ABSTRACT This paper investigates the
More informationModelling Stock Returns Volatility on Uganda Securities Exchange
Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 8, 2014, no. 104, 5173-5184 HIKARI Ltd, www.m-hikari.com http://dx.doi.org/10.12988/ams.2014.46394 Modelling Stock Returns Volatility on Uganda Securities Exchange Jalira
More informationFinancial Data Analysis, WS08/09. Roman Liesenfeld, University of Kiel 1
Financial Data Analysis, WS08/09. Roman Liesenfeld, University of Kiel 1 Data sets used in the following sections can be downloaded from http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/ruey.tsay/teaching/fts/ Exercise Sheet
More information