IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cvt/journl/y2021id686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis of the forecasting quality of the classical statistical model and the machine learning model on the data of the Russian stock market

Author

Listed:
  • A. V. Shcherbinina

  • A. V. Alzheev

Abstract

The main objective of this work is to compare the predictive ability of the classical machine learning model — ARIMA, as the most common and well-studied baseline model, and the ML model based on a sequential neural network — in this case, LSTM. The goal is to maximize accuracy and minimize error — selecting the most appropriate model for predicting time series with the highest accuracy. A description is given for these mathematical models. An algorithm is also proposed for forecasting time series using these models, based on the «Rolling window» approach. Practical implementation is implemented using the Python programming environment with the Pandas, Numpy, pmdarima, Keras, Statsmodels libraries. To train the models, we used stock data at the closing price per share of the leading Russian companies: Yandex, VTB, KamAZ, Kiwi, Gazprom, NLMK, Rosneft, Alrosa for the period. The studies carried out demonstrate the predictive superiority of the approach based on neural networks, while the RMSE is 71% less than the same indicator for the ARIMA model, which allows us to conclude that the use of the LSTM model is preferable for this class of problems.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:cvt:journl:y:2021:id:686
DOI: 10.24182/2073-6258-2021-20-3-52-63
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.scinotes.ru/jour/article/viewFile/686/685
Download Restriction: no

File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24182/2073-6258-2021-20-3-52-63?utm_source=ideas
LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
---><---

More about this item

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:cvt:journl:y:2021:id:686. 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: Ð ÐµÐ´Ð°ÐºÑ†Ð¸Ñ (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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.