A Forecast Comparison of Financial Volatility Models: GARCH (1,1) is not Enough
Asset allocation and risk calculations depend largely on volatile models. The parameters of the volatility models are estimated using either the Maximum Likelihood (ML) or the Quasi-Maximum Likelihood (QML). By comparing the out-of-sample forecasting performance of 68 ARCH-type models using inter-daily data on the peso-dollar exchange rate, this study shows that it is important to correctly specify the distribution of the asset returns and not only focus on the specification of the volatility. The forecasts are compared to the Parkinson Range, an alternative to the Realized Volatility.
|Date of creation:||2004|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in The Philippine Statistician 1-4.53(2004): pp. 1-10|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ludwigstraße 33, D-80539 Munich, Germany|
Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- R. F. Engle & A. J. Patton, 2001. "What good is a volatility model?," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 237-245.
- Asger Lunde & Peter Reinhard Hansen, 2001.
"A Forecast Comparison of Volatility Models: Does Anything Beat a GARCH(1,1)?,"
2001-04, Brown University, Department of Economics.
- Asger Lunde & Peter R. Hansen, 2005. "A forecast comparison of volatility models: does anything beat a GARCH(1,1)?," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(7), pages 873-889.
- Neil Shephard & Ole E. Barndorff-Nielsen, 2002.
"Estimating quadratic variation using realised variance,"
Economics Series Working Papers
2001-W20, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
- Ole E. Barndorff-Nielsen & Neil Shephard, 2002. "Estimating quadratic variation using realized variance," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 457-477.
- Nelson, Daniel B, 1991. "Conditional Heteroskedasticity in Asset Returns: A New Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 347-70, March.
- Tim Bollerslev, 1986.
"Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity,"
EERI Research Paper Series
EERI RP 1986/01, Economics and Econometrics Research Institute (EERI), Brussels.
- Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
- Glosten, Lawrence R & Jagannathan, Ravi & Runkle, David E, 1993.
" On the Relation between the Expected Value and the Volatility of the Nominal Excess Return on Stocks,"
Journal of Finance,
American Finance Association, vol. 48(5), pages 1779-1801, December.
- Lawrence R. Glosten & Ravi Jagannathan & David E. Runkle, 1993. "On the relation between the expected value and the volatility of the nominal excess return on stocks," Staff Report 157, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Engle, Robert F, 1982. "Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 987-1007, July.
- Parkinson, Michael, 1980. "The Extreme Value Method for Estimating the Variance of the Rate of Return," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(1), pages 61-65, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:21028. 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: (Joachim Winter)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.