IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedlwp/89216.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability: Existence, Size, and Power

Author

Abstract

We investigate a test of conditional predictive ability described in Giacomini and White (2006; Econometrica). Our main goal is simply to demonstrate existence of the null hypothesis and, in doing so, clarify just how unlikely it is for this hypothesis to hold. We do so using a simple example of point forecasting under quadratic loss. We then provide simulation evidence on the size and power of the test. While the test can be accurately sized we find that power is typically low.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael W. McCracken, 2020. "Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability: Existence, Size, and Power," Working Papers 2020-050, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedlwp:89216
    DOI: 10.20955/wp.2020.050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://s3.amazonaws.com/real.stlouisfed.org/wp/2020/2020-050.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.20955/wp.2020.050?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gonçalves, Sílvia & McCracken, Michael W. & Perron, Benoit, 2017. "Tests of equal accuracy for nested models with estimated factors," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 231-252.
    2. Clark, Todd & McCracken, Michael, 2013. "Advances in Forecast Evaluation," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1107-1201, Elsevier.
    3. Raffaella Giacomini & Barbara Rossi, 2009. "Detecting and Predicting Forecast Breakdowns," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(2), pages 669-705.
    4. Barbara Rossi & Atsushi Inoue, 2012. "Out-of-Sample Forecast Tests Robust to the Choice of Window Size," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 432-453, April.
    5. Whitney K. Newey & Kenneth D. West, 1994. "Automatic Lag Selection in Covariance Matrix Estimation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 61(4), pages 631-653.
    6. Li, Jia & Patton, Andrew J., 2018. "Asymptotic inference about predictive accuracy using high frequency data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 223-240.
    7. McCracken, Michael W., 2007. "Asymptotics for out of sample tests of Granger causality," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 719-752, October.
    8. Clark, Todd E. & McCracken, Michael W., 2001. "Tests of equal forecast accuracy and encompassing for nested models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 85-110, November.
    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.
    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. Clark, Todd & McCracken, Michael, 2013. "Advances in Forecast Evaluation," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1107-1201, Elsevier.
    2. Daniel Borup & Jonas N. Eriksen & Mads M. Kjær & Martin Thyrsgaard, 2020. "Predicting bond return predictability," CREATES Research Papers 2020-09, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    3. Laura Coroneo & Fabrizio Iacone, 2020. "Comparing predictive accuracy in small samples using fixed‐smoothing asymptotics," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(4), pages 391-409, June.
    4. Michael W. McCracken, 2019. "Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability: Some Simulation Evidence," Working Papers 2019-11, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    5. Rossi, Barbara, 2013. "Advances in Forecasting under Instability," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1203-1324, Elsevier.
    6. Mayer, Walter J. & Liu, Feng & Dang, Xin, 2017. "Improving the power of the Diebold–Mariano–West test for least squares predictions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 618-626.
    7. Firmin Doko Tchatoka & Qazi Haque, 2023. "On bootstrapping tests of equal forecast accuracy for nested models," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(7), pages 1844-1864, November.
    8. McGurk, Zachary, 2020. "US real estate inflation prediction: Exchange rates and net foreign assets," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 53-66.
    9. Pincheira, Pablo & Hardy, Nicolas, 2022. "Correlation Based Tests of Predictability," MPRA Paper 112014, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Raffaella Giacomini & Barbara Rossi, 2013. "Forecasting in macroeconomics," Chapters, in: Nigar Hashimzade & Michael A. Thornton (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Empirical Macroeconomics, chapter 17, pages 381-408, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Sekkel, Rodrigo M., 2015. "Balance sheets of financial intermediaries: Do they forecast economic activity?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 263-275.
    12. Nicolas S. Magner & Nicolás Hardy & Tiago Ferreira & Jaime F. Lavin, 2023. "“Agree to Disagree”: Forecasting Stock Market Implied Volatility Using Financial Report Tone Disagreement Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, March.
    13. Rapach, David & Zhou, Guofu, 2013. "Forecasting Stock Returns," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 328-383, Elsevier.
    14. Pablo Pincheira & Nicolás Hardy & Felipe Muñoz, 2021. "“Go Wild for a While!”: A New Test for Forecast Evaluation in Nested Models," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(18), pages 1-28, September.
    15. Laura Coroneo & Fabrizio Iacone, 2015. "Comparing predictive accuracy in small samples," Discussion Papers 15/15, Department of Economics, University of York.
    16. Norman R. Swanson & Weiqi Xiong, 2018. "Big data analytics in economics: What have we learned so far, and where should we go from here?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 695-746, August.
    17. Götz, Thomas B. & Knetsch, Thomas A., 2019. "Google data in bridge equation models for German GDP," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 45-66.
    18. Jaime Casassus & Freddy Higuera, 2011. "Stock Return Predictability and Oil Prices," Documentos de Trabajo 406, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    19. Richard A. Ashley & Kwok Ping Tsang, 2014. "Credible Granger-Causality Inference with Modest Sample Lengths: A Cross-Sample Validation Approach," Econometrics, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-20, March.
    20. Ma, Feng & Liu, Jing & Wahab, M.I.M. & Zhang, Yaojie, 2018. "Forecasting the aggregate oil price volatility in a data-rich environment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 320-332.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    prediction; out-of-sample; inference;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection

    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:fip:fedlwp:89216. 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: Anna Oates (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbslus.html .

    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.