Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Repositório do ISCTE...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

Predictive accuracy of alternative autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models

Authors: Garcia, Carlos Diogo Monteiro;

Predictive accuracy of alternative autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models

Abstract

Esta tese tem como objectivo comparar alguns do mais populares modelos de volatilidade, em termos da sua capacidade preditiva. Especificamente, iremos usar três modelos auto-regressivos de heterocedasticidade condicional, GARCH, EGARCH e GJR. Para proceder à comparação entre modelos, iremos servir-nos de alguns dos mais recentes testes de capacidade preditiva: Diebold-Mariano (1995), Diebold-Mariano modificado (1997), Morgan-Granger-Newbold modificado (1997), Harvey-Leybourne-Newbold (1998), Harvey-Newbold (2000) e Hansen (2005). A nossa análise irá ser feita com base nos índices CAC40, FTSE100, NIKKEI225 e S&P500, para o período de 1 de Janeiro de 1995 até 31 de Dezembro de 2009. Os resultados obtidos, embora não sendo conclusivos, apontam para uma superior capacidade preditiva dos modelos assimétricos (EGARCH e GJR), face ao GARCH. O facto de não conseguirmos apontar claramente o melhor modelo, de entre os modelos assimétricos, pode ser explicado pelos diversos episódios de volatilidade elevada que tiveram lugar nas últimas duas décadas.

The main objective of this thesis is to compare some of the most popular volatility models, in terms of their predictive accuracy. Specifically, we will use three autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) models, GARCH, EGARCH and GJR. In order to compare these models, we will use some of the most recent predictive accuracy tests: Diebold-Mariano (1995), modified Diebold-Mariano (1997), modified Morgan-Granger-Newbold (1997), Harvey-Leybourne-Newbold (1998), Harvey-Newbold (2000) and Hansen (2005). We will consider the CAC40, FTSE100, NIKKEI225 and S&p500 indexes in our analysis, from January 1, 1995 through December 31, 2009. The results obtained, although not being conclusive, point out to a superior predictive accuracy of asymmetric models (EGARCH and GJR), in relation to GARCH. The fact that we can’t clearly point out the best model, between the asymmetric ones, may be explained by the several episodes of high volatility that toke place over the last two decades.

Country
Portugal
Keywords

Comparação de modelos, Predictive accuracy tests, Domínio/Área Científica::Ciências Sociais::Economia e Gestão, ARCH models, Previsão de volatilidade, Testes de capacidade preditiva, Forecasting volatility, Model comparison, Modelos ARCH

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 67
    download downloads 89
  • 67
    views
    89
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
67
89
Green