IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/empeco/v69y2025i3d10.1007_s00181-025-02765-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing real-time uncertainty of the Hodrick-Prescott and Hamilton trend/cycle decompositions

Author

Listed:
  • Kristian Jönsson

    (Sveriges Riksbank)

Abstract

Methods for decomposing aggregate time series into trend and cycle components are frequently used in macroeconomics. When choosing which method to employ for this purpose, revision properties are often considered. In this article, the trend/cycle decomposition methods suggested by Hodrick and Prescott (1997) and by Hamilton (2018) are compared with respect to their revision properties at different time-series sample positions. Considering revisions for different sample positions individually, without aggregating into a summary statistic for the entire sample, can nuance results. It is shown that the filters have distinctly differing real-time revision properties that vary considerably across sample positions. While the investigated revision properties are worse for the HP filter during an initial period when more data become available, the Hamilton filter’s properties degrade slowly over time and tend to eventually become worse than those of the HP filter when more observations have become available. These nuances are not possible to trace out when investigating revision properties using methods that do not account for properties at specific sample positions. The results imply that which decomposition method is preferable in terms of real-time uncertainty depends on what profile of instability is deemed least problematic for the empirical situation under consideration. As a consequence, choosing between the two filters becomes an important trade-off with respect to the filters’ revision properties in the light of the specific task at hand and the preferences of the practitioner.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristian Jönsson, 2025. "Comparing real-time uncertainty of the Hodrick-Prescott and Hamilton trend/cycle decompositions," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 69(3), pages 1335-1361, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:69:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s00181-025-02765-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s00181-025-02765-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00181-025-02765-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00181-025-02765-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Athanasios Orphanides & Simon van Norden, 2002. "The Unreliability of Output-Gap Estimates in Real Time," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 569-583, November.
    2. Günes Kamber & James Morley & Benjamin Wong, 2018. "Intuitive and Reliable Estimates of the Output Gap from a Beveridge-Nelson Filter," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(3), pages 550-566, July.
    3. Kamber, Güneş & Morley, James & Wong, Benjamin, 2025. "Trend-cycle decomposition in the presence of large shocks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    4. Kristian Jönsson, 2024. "Simulation-Based Analysis of Real-Time Reliability for Trend/Cycle Decompositions," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 20(2), pages 219-242, July.
    5. Lawrence J. Christiano & Terry J. Fitzgerald, 2003. "The Band Pass Filter," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(2), pages 435-465, May.
    6. James C. Morley & Charles R. Nelson & Eric Zivot, 2003. "Why Are the Beveridge-Nelson and Unobserved-Components Decompositions of GDP So Different?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(2), pages 235-243, May.
    7. James D. Hamilton, 2018. "Why You Should Never Use the Hodrick-Prescott Filter," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 831-843, December.
    8. King, Robert G. & Rebelo, Sergio T., 1993. "Low frequency filtering and real business cycles," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 207-231.
    9. Cayen, Jean-Philippe & van Norden, Simon, 2005. "The reliability of Canadian output-gap estimates," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 373-393, December.
    10. Francesco Furlanetto & Kåre Hagelund & Frank Hansen & Ørjan Robstad, 2023. "Norges Bank Output Gap Estimates: Forecasting Properties, Reliability, Cyclical Sensitivity and Hysteresis," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 85(1), pages 238-267, February.
    11. Camba-Mendez, Gonzalo & Rodriguez-Palenzuela, Diego, 2003. "Assessment criteria for output gap estimates," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 529-562, May.
    12. Moura, Alban, 2024. "Why You Should Never Use the Hodrick-Prescott Filter. A Comment on Hamilton (The Review of Economics and Statistics, 2018)," Journal of Comments and Replications in Economics (JCRE), ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 3, pages 1-17.
    13. Kristian Jönsson, 2020. "Cyclical Dynamics and Trend/Cycle Definitions: Comparing the HP and Hamilton Filters," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 16(2), pages 151-162, November.
    14. Mise, Emi & Kim, Tae-Hwan & Newbold, Paul, 2005. "On suboptimality of the Hodrick-Prescott filter at time series endpoints," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 53-67, March.
    15. Josefine Quast & Maik H. Wolters, 2022. "Reliable Real-Time Output Gap Estimates Based on a Modified Hamilton Filter," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 152-168, January.
    16. Ziwei Mei & Peter C. B. Phillips & Zhentao Shi, 2024. "The boosted Hodrick‐Prescott filter is more general than you might think," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(7), pages 1260-1281, November.
    17. Biolsi, Christopher, 2023. "Do the Hamilton and Beveridge–Nelson filters provide the same information about output gaps? An empirical comparison for practitioners," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    18. Cogley, Timothy & Nason, James M., 1995. "Effects of the Hodrick-Prescott filter on trend and difference stationary time series Implications for business cycle research," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 253-278.
    19. Kristian Jönsson, 2020. "Real-time US GDP gap properties using Hamilton’s regression-based filter," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 307-314, 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. Kamber, Güneş & Morley, James & Wong, Benjamin, 2025. "Trend-cycle decomposition in the presence of large shocks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Josefine Quast & Maik H. Wolters, 2022. "Reliable Real-Time Output Gap Estimates Based on a Modified Hamilton Filter," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 152-168, January.
    3. Lars-H. R. Siemers, 2024. "On the Hamilton-HP Filter Controversy: Evidence from German Business Cycles," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 20(3), pages 367-409, November.
    4. Arčabić, Vladimir & Panovska, Irina & Tica, Josip, 2024. "Business cycle synchronization and asymmetry in the European Union," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    5. Biolsi, Christopher, 2023. "Do the Hamilton and Beveridge–Nelson filters provide the same information about output gaps? An empirical comparison for practitioners," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    6. Yves Schueler, 2024. "Filtering economic time series: On the cyclical properties of Hamilton’s regression filter and the Hodrick-Prescott filter," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 54, October.
    7. Chalmovianský, Jakub & Němec, Daniel, 2022. "Assessing uncertainty of output gap estimates: Evidence from Visegrad countries," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    8. Jaqueson K. Galimberti & Marcelo L. Moura, 2011. "Improving the reliability of real-time Hodrick-Prescott filtering using survey forecasts," Centre for Growth and Business Cycle Research Discussion Paper Series 159, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    9. Viv B. Hall & Peter Thomson, 2021. "Does Hamilton’s OLS Regression Provide a “better alternative” to the Hodrick-Prescott Filter? A New Zealand Business Cycle Perspective," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 17(2), pages 151-183, November.
    10. Melina Dritsaki & Chaido Dritsaki, 2022. "Comparison of HP Filter and the Hamilton’s Regression," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Ziwei Mei & Zhentao Shi & Peter C. B. Phillips, 2022. "The boosted HP filter is more general than you might think," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2348, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    12. Berger, Tino & Richter, Julia & Wong, Benjamin, 2022. "A unified approach for jointly estimating the business and financial cycle, and the role of financial factors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    13. Cayen, Jean-Philippe & van Norden, Simon, 2005. "The reliability of Canadian output-gap estimates," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 373-393, December.
    14. Sarah Fischer & Christian Glocker & Serguei Kaniovski & Philipp Wegmüller, 2024. "Assessing the Potential Output for Switzerland: Determinants, Trends and Drivers," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 20(2), pages 297-338, July.
    15. Galimberti, Jaqueson K. & Moura, Marcelo L., 2016. "Improving the reliability of real-time output gap estimates using survey forecasts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 358-373.
    16. Robert J. Hodrick, 2020. "An Exploration of Trend-Cycle Decomposition Methodologies in Simulated Data," NBER Working Papers 26750, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Álvarez, Luis J. & Gómez-Loscos, Ana, 2018. "A menu on output gap estimation methods," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 827-850.
    18. Berger, Tino & Richter, Julia & Wong, Benjamin, 2022. "A unified approach for jointly estimating the business and financial cycle, and the role of financial factors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    19. Fukuda, Kosei, 2012. "Illustrating extraordinary shocks causing trend breaks," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 1045-1052.
    20. Kristian Jönsson, 2024. "Simulation-Based Analysis of Real-Time Reliability for Trend/Cycle Decompositions," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 20(2), pages 219-242, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles
    • E37 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Forecasting and Simulation: Models and Applications

    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:spr:empeco:v:69:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s00181-025-02765-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.