IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/etheor/v33y2017i06p1306-1351_00.html

Robust Forecast Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Jin, Sainan
  • Corradi, Valentina
  • Swanson, Norman R.

Abstract

Forecast accuracy is typically measured in terms of a given loss function. However, as a consequence of the use of misspecified models in multiple model comparisons, relative forecast rankings are loss function dependent. In order to address this issue, a novel criterion for forecast evaluation that utilizes the entire distribution of forecast errors is introduced. In particular, we introduce the concepts of general-loss (GL) forecast superiority and convex-loss (CL) forecast superiority; and we develop tests for GL (CL) superiority that are based on an out-of-sample generalization of the tests introduced by Linton, Maasoumi, and Whang (2005, Review of Economic Studies 72, 735–765). Our test statistics are characterized by nonstandard limiting distributions, under the null, necessitating the use of resampling procedures to obtain critical values. Additionally, the tests are consistent and have nontrivial local power, under a sequence of local alternatives. The above theory is developed for the stationary case, as well as for the case of heterogeneity that is induced by distributional change over time. Monte Carlo simulations suggest that the tests perform reasonably well in finite samples, and an application in which we examine exchange rate data indicates that our tests can help identify superior forecasting models, regardless of loss function.

Suggested Citation

  • Jin, Sainan & Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2017. "Robust Forecast Comparison," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 1306-1351, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:etheor:v:33:y:2017:i:06:p:1306-1351_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0266466616000426/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francis X. Diebold & Minchul Shin, 2017. "Assessing point forecast accuracy by stochastic error distance," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(6-9), pages 588-598, October.
    2. Arvanitis, Stelios & Post, Thierry & Potì, Valerio & Karabati, Selcuk, 2021. "Nonparametric tests for Optimal Predictive Ability," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 881-898.
    3. Post, Thierry & Karabatı, Selçuk & Arvanitis, Stelios, 2019. "Robust optimization of forecast combinations," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 910-926.
    4. Anghel, Dan Gabriel, 2021. "Data Snooping Bias in Tests of the Relative Performance of Multiple Forecasting Models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    5. Coroneo, Laura, 2026. "Forecasting for monetary policy," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 22-33.
    6. Sander Barendse & Andrew J. Patton, 2022. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy in the Presence of a Loss Function Shape Parameter," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 1057-1069, June.
    7. Mehmet Pinar & Thanasis Stengos & Nikolas Topaloglou, 2022. "Stochastic dominance spanning and augmenting the human development index with institutional quality," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 341-369, August.
    8. Valentina Corradi & Sainan Jin & Norman R. Swanson, 2023. "Robust forecast superiority testing with an application to assessing pools of expert forecasters," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(4), pages 596-622, June.
    9. Norman R. Swanson & Weiqi Xiong, 2018. "Big data analytics in economics: What have we learned so far, and where should we go from here?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 51(3), pages 695-746, August.
    10. Anyfantaki, Sofia & Arvanitis, Stelios & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2021. "Diversification benefits in the cryptocurrency market under mild explosivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(1), pages 378-393.
    11. Yen, Yu-Min & Yen, Tso-Jung, 2021. "Testing forecast accuracy of expectiles and quantiles with the extremal consistent loss functions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 733-758.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:etheor:v:33:y:2017:i:06:p:1306-1351_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ect .

    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.