IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of ARIMA forecasting and heuristic modelling


  • Chi-Chen Wang
  • Yun-Sheng Hsu
  • Cheng-Hwai Liou


The study compares the application of the forecasting methods Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) time series model and fuzzy time series by heuristic models on the amount of Taiwan export. When our model prolongs the sample period, the predicted error is smaller for the ARIMA model than for the heuristic model. Moreover, the predicted trajectory of the ARIMA model is much closer to the realistic trend than the heuristic model. Thus, the ARIMA model can forecast the export amount more accurately than the heuristic models. In the economic viewpoints, the amount of Taiwan exports is mainly attributable to external factors. In addition, the impact reduces with time and the export with lags 12 or 13 do not affect current export amount anymore. If the sample period is shorter, the heuristic models outperform ARIMA models. A heuristic fuzzy time series model can be utilized to predict export values accurately, when only small set of data is available.

Suggested Citation

  • Chi-Chen Wang & Yun-Sheng Hsu & Cheng-Hwai Liou, 2011. "A comparison of ARIMA forecasting and heuristic modelling," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(15), pages 1095-1102.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:apfiec:v:21:y:2011:i:15:p:1095-1102 DOI: 10.1080/09603107.2010.537629

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Christopher Ting, 2006. "Which Daily Price is Less Noisy?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 35(3), pages 81-95, September.
    2. Hansen, Peter Reinhard, 2005. "A Test for Superior Predictive Ability," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 365-380, October.
    3. Bakshi, Gurdip & Cao, Charles & Chen, Zhiwu, 1997. " Empirical Performance of Alternative Option Pricing Models," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(5), pages 2003-2049, December.
    4. Koopman, Siem Jan & Jungbacker, Borus & Hol, Eugenie, 2005. "Forecasting daily variability of the S&P 100 stock index using historical, realised and implied volatility measurements," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 445-475, June.
    5. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    6. Robert C. Merton, 2005. "Theory of rational option pricing," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Theory Of Valuation, chapter 8, pages 229-288 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Christoffersen, Peter & Jacobs, Kris, 2004. "The importance of the loss function in option valuation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 291-318, May.
    8. Lopez, Jose A, 2001. "Evaluating the Predictive Accuracy of Volatility Models," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 87-109, March.
    9. Heston, Steven L & Nandi, Saikat, 2000. "A Closed-Form GARCH Option Valuation Model," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 13(3), pages 585-625.
    10. Christopher Ting, 2006. "Which Daily Price is Less Noisy?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 35(3), Autumn.
    11. Patton, Andrew J., 2011. "Volatility forecast comparison using imperfect volatility proxies," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 246-256, January.
    12. Bernard Dumas & Jeff Fleming & Robert E. Whaley, 1998. "Implied Volatility Functions: Empirical Tests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(6), pages 2059-2106, December.
    13. Halbert White, 2000. "A Reality Check for Data Snooping," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1097-1126, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Robert Lehmann, 2015. "Survey-based indicators vs. hard data: What improves export forecasts in Europe?," ERSA conference papers ersa15p756, European Regional Science Association.


    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:taf:apfiec:v:21:y:2011:i:15:p:1095-1102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Chris Longhurst). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.