IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2106.11104.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On Testing Equal Conditional Predictive Ability Under Measurement Error

Author

Listed:
  • Yannick Hoga
  • Timo Dimitriadis

Abstract

Loss functions are widely used to compare several competing forecasts. However, forecast comparisons are often based on mismeasured proxy variables for the true target. We introduce the concept of exact robustness to measurement error for loss functions and fully characterize this class of loss functions as the Bregman class. For such exactly robust loss functions, forecast loss differences are on average unaffected by the use of proxy variables and, thus, inference on conditional predictive ability can be carried out as usual. Moreover, we show that more precise proxies give predictive ability tests higher power in discriminating between competing forecasts. Simulations illustrate the different behavior of exactly robust and non-robust loss functions. An empirical application to US GDP growth rates demonstrates that it is easier to discriminate between forecasts issued at different horizons if a better proxy for GDP growth is used.

Suggested Citation

  • Yannick Hoga & Timo Dimitriadis, 2021. "On Testing Equal Conditional Predictive Ability Under Measurement Error," Papers 2106.11104, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2106.11104
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2106.11104
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gneiting, Tilmann, 2011. "Making and Evaluating Point Forecasts," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 106(494), pages 746-762.
    2. Raffaella Giacomini & Halbert White, 2006. "Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1545-1578, November.
    3. Tilmann Gneiting & Roopesh Ranjan, 2011. "Comparing Density Forecasts Using Threshold- and Quantile-Weighted Scoring Rules," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 411-422, July.
    4. Jonas R. Brehmer & Tilmann Gneiting, 2020. "Properization: constructing proper scoring rules via Bayes acts," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 72(3), pages 659-673, June.
    5. Gneiting, Tilmann & Ranjan, Roopesh, 2011. "Comparing Density Forecasts Using Threshold- and Quantile-Weighted Scoring Rules," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 29(3), pages 411-422.
    6. Hajo Holzmann & Matthias Eulert, 2014. "The role of the information set for forecasting - with applications to risk management," Papers 1404.7653, arXiv.org.
    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. Tobias Fissler & Hajo Holzmann, 2022. "Measurability of functionals and of ideal point forecasts," Papers 2203.08635, arXiv.org.

    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. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    2. Hajo Holzmann & Matthias Eulert, 2014. "The role of the information set for forecasting - with applications to risk management," Papers 1404.7653, arXiv.org.
    3. Gordy, Michael B. & McNeil, Alexander J., 2020. "Spectral backtests of forecast distributions with application to risk management," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    4. Kolassa, Stephan, 2016. "Evaluating predictive count data distributions in retail sales forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 788-803.
    5. Werner Ehm & Tilmann Gneiting & Alexander Jordan & Fabian Krüger, 2016. "Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(3), pages 505-562, June.
    6. Diks, Cees & Fang, Hao, 2020. "Comparing density forecasts in a risk management context," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 531-551.
    7. Tobias Fissler & Hajo Holzmann, 2022. "Measurability of functionals and of ideal point forecasts," Papers 2203.08635, arXiv.org.
    8. Marc-Oliver Pohle, 2020. "The Murphy Decomposition and the Calibration-Resolution Principle: A New Perspective on Forecast Evaluation," Papers 2005.01835, arXiv.org.
    9. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    10. Bastianin, Andrea & Galeotti, Marzio & Manera, Matteo, 2014. "Causality and predictability in distribution: The ethanol–food price relation revisited," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 152-160.
    11. Tomasz Serafin & Bartosz Uniejewski & Rafał Weron, 2019. "Averaging Predictive Distributions Across Calibration Windows for Day-Ahead Electricity Price Forecasting," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-12, July.
    12. Berg, Tim O. & Henzel, Steffen R., 2015. "Point and density forecasts for the euro area using Bayesian VARs," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 1067-1095.
    13. Emilio Zanetti Chini, 2018. "Forecasters’ utility and forecast coherence," CREATES Research Papers 2018-23, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    14. Sándor Baran & Patrícia Szokol & Marianna Szabó, 2021. "Truncated generalized extreme value distribution‐based ensemble model output statistics model for calibration of wind speed ensemble forecasts," Environmetrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(6), September.
    15. Delle Monache, Davide & Petrella, Ivan, 2017. "Adaptive models and heavy tails with an application to inflation forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 482-501.
    16. Bruzda, Joanna, 2019. "Quantile smoothing in supply chain and logistics forecasting," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 122-139.
    17. Kapetanios, G. & Mitchell, J. & Price, S. & Fawcett, N., 2015. "Generalised density forecast combinations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 150-165.
    18. Garratt, Anthony & Henckel, Timo & Vahey, Shaun P., 2023. "Empirically-transformed linear opinion pools," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 736-753.
    19. Ravazzolo Francesco & Rothman Philip, 2016. "Oil-price density forecasts of US GDP," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 20(4), pages 441-453, September.
    20. Matteo Iacopini & Francesco Ravazzolo & Luca Rossini, 2020. "Proper scoring rules for evaluating asymmetry in density forecasting," Papers 2006.11265, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2020.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:2106.11104. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.