IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Tests for the Null Hypothesis of Cointegration: a Monte Carlo Comparison

The aim of this paper is to compare the relative performance of several tests for the null hypothesis of cointegration, in terms of size and power in finite samples. This is carried out resorting to Monte Carlo simulations, considering a range of plausible data-generating processes. As of this writing, there is no study providing guidance on the use of this type of procedures in empirical situations, with the exception of the limited studies of McCabe et al. (1997) and Haug (1996). We also analyse the impact on size and power of choosing different procedures to estimate the long-run variance of the errors. we found that the parametrically adjusted test of McCabe et al. (1997) is the most well-balanced test in terms of power and size distrortions.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www3.eeg.uminho.pt/economia/nipe/docs/2001/NIPE_WP_7_2001.PDF
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by NIPE - Universidade do Minho in its series NIPE Working Papers with number 7/2001.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nip:nipewp:7/2001
Contact details of provider: Postal: Núcleo de Investigação em Políticas Económicas, Escola de Economia e Gestão, Universidade do Minho, P-4710-057 Braga, Portugal
Phone: +351-253604510 ext 5532
Fax: +351-253601380
Web page: http://www3.eeg.uminho.pt/economia/nipe/versao_inglesa/index_uk.htmEmail:


More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Email:


References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Haug, Alfred A., 1996. "Tests for cointegration a Monte Carlo comparison," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1-2), pages 89-115.
  2. Park, Joon Y, 1992. "Canonical Cointegrating Regressions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 119-43, January.
  3. Ploberger, Werner & Kramer, Walter & Kontrus, Karl, 1989. "A new test for structural stability in the linear regression model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 307-318, February.
  4. Carrion-i-Silvestre, Josep Lluis & Sanso-i-Rossello, Andreu & Ortuno, Manuel Artis, 2001. "Unit root and stationarity tests' wedding," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 1-8, January.
  5. Phillips, Peter C B & Hansen, Bruce E, 1990. "Statistical Inference in Instrumental Variables Regression with I(1) Processes," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 99-125, January.
  6. Hao, K., 1996. "Testing for Structural Change in Cointegrated Regression Models: Some Comparisons and Generalizations," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 3/96, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
  7. Lee, Junsoo, 1996. "On the power of stationarity tests using optimal bandwidth estimates," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 131-137, May.
  8. Schwert, G William, 1989. "Tests for Unit Roots: A Monte Carlo Investigation," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 7(2), pages 147-59, April.
  9. Peter C.B. Phillips & Sam Ouliaris, 1987. "Asymptotic Properties of Residual Based Tests for Cointegration," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 847R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jul 1988.
  10. repec:cup:etheor:v:6:y:1990:i:4:p:433-44 is not listed on IDEAS
  11. repec:cup:etheor:v:10:y:1994:i:1:p:95-115 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. Markku Lanne & Pentti Saikkonen, 2003. "Reducing size distortions of parametric stationarity tests," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(4), pages 423-439, 07.
  13. Phillips, P C B & Durlauf, S N, 1986. "Multiple Time Series Regression with Integrated Processes," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 473-95, August.
  14. Donald W.K. Andrews, 1988. "Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 877R, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Jul 1989.
  15. Xiao, Zhijie, 1999. "A residual based test for the null hypothesis of cointegration," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 133-141, August.
  16. Tanaka, Katsuto, 1990. "Testing for a Moving Average Unit Root," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(04), pages 433-444, December.
  17. Bart Hobijn & Philip Hans Franses & Marius Ooms, 2004. "Generalizations of the KPSS-test for stationarity," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 58(4), pages 483-502.
  18. Denis Kwiatkowski & Peter C.B. Phillips & Peter Schmidt, 1991. "Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity Against the Alternative of a Unit Root: How Sure Are We That Economic Time Series Have a Unit Root?," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 979, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  19. Charemza, Wojciech W. & Syczewska, Ewa M., 1998. "Joint application of the Dickey-Fuller and KPSS tests," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 17-21, October.
  20. Shin, Yongcheol, 1994. "A Residual-Based Test of the Null of Cointegration Against the Alternative of No Cointegration," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(01), pages 91-115, March.
  21. Saikkonen, Pentti, 1991. "Asymptotically Efficient Estimation of Cointegration Regressions," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(01), pages 1-21, March.
  22. Leybourne, S J & McCabe, B P M, 1994. "A Consistent Test for a Unit Root," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 12(2), pages 157-66, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nip:nipewp:7/2001. 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: (Maria João Thompson)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.