IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v11y2023i12p211-d1295004.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performance of the Realized-GARCH Model against Other GARCH Types in Predicting Cryptocurrency Volatility

Author

Listed:
  • Rhenan G. S. Queiroz

    (Institute of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, University of São Paulo, São Carlos 13566-590, Brazil
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Sergio A. David

    (Institute of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, University of São Paulo, São Carlos 13566-590, Brazil
    Department of Biosystems Engineering, University of São Paulo, Pirassununga 13635-900, Brazil
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Cryptocurrencies have increasingly attracted the attention of several players interested in crypto assets. Their rapid growth and dynamic nature require robust methods for modeling their volatility. The Generalized Auto Regressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity (GARCH) model is a well-known mathematical tool for predicting volatility. Nonetheless, the Realized-GARCH model has been particularly under-explored in the literature involving cryptocurrency volatility. This study emphasizes an investigation on the performance of the Realized-GARCH against a range of GARCH-based models to predict the volatility of five prominent cryptocurrency assets. Our analyses have been performed in both in-sample and out-of-sample cases. The results indicate that while distinct GARCH models can produce satisfactory in-sample fits, the Realized-GARCH model outperforms its counterparts in out of-sample forecasting. This paper contributes to the existing literature, since it better reveals the predictability performance of Realized-GARCH model when compared to other GARCH-types analyzed when an out-of-sample case is considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Rhenan G. S. Queiroz & Sergio A. David, 2023. "Performance of the Realized-GARCH Model against Other GARCH Types in Predicting Cryptocurrency Volatility," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2023:i:12:p:211-:d:1295004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/12/211/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/12/211/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Asger Lunde & Peter R. Hansen, 2005. "A forecast comparison of volatility models: does anything beat a GARCH(1,1)?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(7), pages 873-889.
    2. Patton, Andrew J., 2011. "Volatility forecast comparison using imperfect volatility proxies," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 246-256, January.
    3. Liu, Lily Y. & Patton, Andrew J. & Sheppard, Kevin, 2015. "Does anything beat 5-minute RV? A comparison of realized measures across multiple asset classes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 293-311.
    4. Glosten, Lawrence R & Jagannathan, Ravi & Runkle, David E, 1993. "On the Relation between the Expected Value and the Volatility of the Nominal Excess Return on Stocks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(5), pages 1779-1801, December.
    5. Peter Reinhard Hansen & Zhuo Huang & Howard Howan Shek, 2012. "Realized GARCH: a joint model for returns and realized measures of volatility," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(6), pages 877-906, September.
    6. Dimos S. Kambouroudis & David G. McMillan & Katerina Tsakou, 2021. "Forecasting realized volatility: The role of implied volatility, leverage effect, overnight returns, and volatility of realized volatility," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(10), pages 1618-1639, October.
    7. Engle, Robert F, 1982. "Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 987-1007, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Harry-Paul Vander Elst, 2015. "FloGARCH: Realizing Long Memory and Asymmetries in Returns Valitility," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2015-12, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Ekaterina Smetanina, 2017. "Real-Time GARCH," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(4), pages 561-601.
    3. Amélie Charles & Olivier Darné, 2019. "The accuracy of asymmetric GARCH model estimation," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 157, pages 179-202.
    4. Martin, Vance L. & Tang, Chrismin & Yao, Wenying, 2021. "Forecasting the volatility of asset returns: The informational gains from option prices," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 862-880.
    5. Trucíos, Carlos, 2019. "Forecasting Bitcoin risk measures: A robust approach," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 836-847.
    6. Allan Timmermann, 2018. "Forecasting Methods in Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 449-479, November.
    7. Timmermann, Allan, 2018. "Forecasting Methods in Finance," CEPR Discussion Papers 12692, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Ma, Feng & Li, Yu & Liu, Li & Zhang, Yaojie, 2018. "Are low-frequency data really uninformative? A forecasting combination perspective," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 92-108.
    9. Chen Liu & Chao Wang & Minh-Ngoc Tran & Robert Kohn, 2023. "Deep Learning Enhanced Realized GARCH," Papers 2302.08002, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    10. Takahashi, Makoto & Watanabe, Toshiaki & Omori, Yasuhiro, 2016. "Volatility and quantile forecasts by realized stochastic volatility models with generalized hyperbolic distribution," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 437-457.
    11. David E. Rapach & Jack K. Strauss, 2008. "Structural breaks and GARCH models of exchange rate volatility," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(1), pages 65-90.
    12. Vacca, Gianmarco & Zoia, Maria Grazia & Bagnato, Luca, 2022. "Forecasting in GARCH models with polynomially modified innovations," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 117-141.
    13. Yusui Tang & Feng Ma & Yaojie Zhang & Yu Wei, 2022. "Forecasting the oil price realized volatility: A multivariate heterogeneous autoregressive model," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 4770-4783, October.
    14. Catania, Leopoldo & Proietti, Tommaso, 2020. "Forecasting volatility with time-varying leverage and volatility of volatility effects," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 1301-1317.
    15. Horpestad, Jone B. & Lyócsa, Štefan & Molnár, Peter & Olsen, Torbjørn B., 2019. "Asymmetric volatility in equity markets around the world," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 540-554.
    16. Papantonis, Ioannis & Rompolis, Leonidas & Tzavalis, Elias, 2023. "Improving variance forecasts: The role of Realized Variance features," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1221-1237.
    17. Yves Dominicy & Harry-Paul Vander Elst, 2015. "Macro-Driven VaR Forecasts: From Very High to Very Low Frequency Data," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2015-41, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Charles, Amélie & Darné, Olivier, 2017. "Forecasting crude-oil market volatility: Further evidence with jumps," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 508-519.
    19. Amendola, A. & Candila, V. & Cipollini, F. & Gallo, G.M., 2024. "Doubly multiplicative error models with long- and short-run components," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. Chen, Hongtao & Liu, Li & Li, Xiaolei, 2018. "The predictive content of CBOE crude oil volatility index," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 492(C), pages 837-850.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2023:i:12:p:211-:d:1295004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.