IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/abn/wpaper/auwp2010-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bias Correction and Out-of-Sample Forecast Accuracy

Author

Listed:
  • Hyeongwoo Kim
  • Nazif Durmaz

Abstract

We evaluate the usefulness of bias-correction methods for autoregressive (AR) models in terms of out-of-sample forecast accuracy, employing two popular methods proposed by Hansen (1999) and So and Shin (1999). Our Monte Carlo simulations show that these methods do not necessarily achieve better forecasting performances than the bias-uncorrected Least Squares (LS) method, because bias correction tends to increase the variance of the estimator. There is a gain from correcting for bias only when the true data generating process is sufficiently persistent. Though the bias arises in finite samples, the sample size (N) is not a crucial factor of the gains from bias-correction, because both the bias and the variance tend to decrease as N goes up. We also provide a real data application with 7 commodity price indices which confirms our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyeongwoo Kim & Nazif Durmaz, 2010. "Bias Correction and Out-of-Sample Forecast Accuracy," Auburn Economics Working Paper Series auwp2010-02, Department of Economics, Auburn University.
  • Handle: RePEc:abn:wpaper:auwp2010-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cla.auburn.edu/econwp/Archives/2010/2010-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cheung, Yin-Wong & Lai, Kon S., 2000. "On the purchasing power parity puzzle," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 321-330, December.
    2. Kim, Hyeongwoo & Moh, Young-Kyu, 2012. "Examining the evidence of purchasing power parity by recursive mean adjustment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 1850-1857.
    3. Andrews, Donald W K & Monahan, J Christopher, 1992. "An Improved Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 953-966, July.
    4. Jón Steinsson, 2008. "The Dynamic Behavior of the Real Exchange Rate in Sticky Price Models," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 519-533, March.
    5. Bruce E. Hansen, 1999. "The Grid Bootstrap And The Autoregressive Model," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(4), pages 594-607, November.
    6. Taylor, Alan M, 2001. "Potential Pitfalls for the Purchasing-Power-Parity Puzzle? Sampling and Specification Biases in Mean-Reversion Tests of the Law of One Price," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 473-498, March.
    7. Hyeongwoo Kim & Ippei Fujiwara & Bruce E. Hansen & Masao Ogaki, 2015. "Purchasing Power Parity and the Taylor Rule," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 874-903, September.
    8. Karanasos, M. & Sekioua, S.H. & Zeng, N., 2006. "On the order of integration of monthly US ex-ante and ex-post real interest rates: New evidence from over a century of data," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 163-169, February.
    9. 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.
    10. Donggyu Sul & Peter C. B. Phillips & Chi-Young Choi, 2005. "Prewhitening Bias in HAC Estimation," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 67(4), pages 517-546, August.
    11. Murray, Christian J. & Papell, David H., 2002. "The purchasing power parity persistence paradigm," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-19, January.
    12. Gospodinov, Nikolay, 2002. "Median unbiased forecasts for highly persistent autoregressive processes," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 85-101, November.
    13. Rossi, Barbara, 2005. "Confidence Intervals for Half-Life Deviations From Purchasing Power Parity," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 432-442, October.
    14. Andrews, Donald W K, 1993. "Exactly Median-Unbiased Estimation of First Order Autoregressive/Unit Root Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(1), pages 139-165, January.
    15. Kim, Jae H., 2003. "Forecasting autoregressive time series with bias-corrected parameter estimators," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 493-502.
    16. Kim, Hyeongwoo, 2009. "On the usefulness of the contrarian strategy across national stock markets: A grid bootstrap analysis," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 734-744, December.
    17. So, Beong Soo & Shin, Dong Wan, 1999. "Recursive mean adjustment in time-series inferences," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 65-73, May.
    18. Anna Mikusheva, 2007. "Uniform Inference in Autoregressive Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(5), pages 1411-1452, September.
    19. Andrews, Donald W K & Chen, Hong-Yuan, 1994. "Approximately Median-Unbiased Estimation of Autoregressive Models," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(2), pages 187-204, April.
    20. Serena Ng & Pierre Perron, 2001. "LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(6), pages 1519-1554, November.
    21. Taylor, A M Robert, 2002. "Regression-Based Unit Root Tests with Recursive Mean Adjustment for Seasonal and Nonseasonal Time Series," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(2), pages 269-281, April.
    22. Cook, Steven, 2002. "Correcting size distortion of the Dickey-Fuller test via recursive mean adjustment," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 75-79, November.
    23. Kim, Hyeongwoo & Stern, Liliana V. & Stern, Michael L., 2010. "Half-life bias correction and the G7 stock markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 1-3, October.
    24. Chi-Young Choi & Nelson C. Mark & Donggyu Sul, 2010. "Bias Reduction in Dynamic Panel Data Models by Common Recursive Mean Adjustment," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 72(5), pages 567-599, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gonçalves Mazzeu, Joao Henrique & Ruiz, Esther & Veiga, Helena, 2015. "Model uncertainty and the forecast accuracy of ARMA models: A survey," DES - Working Papers. Statistics and Econometrics. WS ws1508, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Estadística.
    2. Carlos A. Medel & Pablo M. Pincheira, 2016. "The out-of-sample performance of an exact median-unbiased estimator for the near-unity AR(1) model," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 126-131, February.
    3. Pablo M. Pincheira & Carlos A. Medel, 2016. "Forecasting with a Random Walk," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 66(6), pages 539-564, December.
    4. Marian Vavra, 2015. "On a Bootstrap Test for Forecast Evaluations," Working and Discussion Papers WP 5/2015, Research Department, National Bank of Slovakia.
    5. Juraj Hucek & Alexander Karsay & Marian Vavra, 2015. "Short-term Forecasting of Real GDP Using Monthly Data," Working and Discussion Papers OP 1/2015, Research Department, National Bank of Slovakia.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Small-Sample Bias; Grid Bootstrap; Recursive Mean Adjustment; Out-of-Sample Forecast;

    JEL classification:

    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:abn:wpaper:auwp2010-02. 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: (Hyeongwoo Kim). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/deaubus.html .

    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 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.

    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.