Forecasting using a large number of predictors: Bayesian model averaging versus principal components regression
We study the performance of Bayesian model averaging as a forecasting method for a large panel of time series and compare its performance to principal components regression (PCR). We show empirically that these forecasts are highly correlated implying similar mean-square forecast errors. Applied to forecasting Industrial production and in ation in the United States, we find that the set of variables deemed informative changes over time which suggest temporal instability due to collinearity and to the of Bayesian variable selection method to minor perturbations of the data. In terms of mean-squared forecast error, principal components based forecasts have a slight marginal advantage over BMA. However, this marginal edge of PCR in the average global out-of-sample performance hides important changes in the local forecasting power of the two approaches. An analysis of the Theil index indicates that the loss of performance of PCR is due mainly to its exuberant biases in matching the mean of the two series especially the in ation series. BMA forecasts series matches the first and second moments of the GDP and in ation series very well with practically zero biases and very low volatility. The fluctuation statistic that measures the relative local performance shows that BMA performed consistently better than PCR and the naive benchmark (random walk) over the period prior to 1985. Thereafter, the performance of both BMA and PCR was relatively modest compared to the naive benchmark.
|Date of creation:||Apr 2013|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Australian School of Business Building, Sydney 2052|
Fax: +61)-2- 9313- 6337
Web page: http://www.economics.unsw.edu.au/
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.:
- Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2002.
"Determining the Number of Factors in Approximate Factor Models,"
Econometric Society, vol. 70(1), pages 191-221, January.
- Tom Doan, . "BAING: RATS procedure to estimate factors in a factor model using Bai-Ng formulas," Statistical Software Components RTS00012, Boston College Department of Economics.
- Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2000. "Determining the Number of Factors in Approximate Factor Models," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 440, Boston College Department of Economics.
- Jushan Bai & Serena Ng, 2000. "Determining the Number of Factors in Approximate Factor Models," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1504, Econometric Society.
- Jushan Bai, 2003. "Inferential Theory for Factor Models of Large Dimensions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 135-171, January.
- Chamberlain, Gary & Rothschild, Michael, 1983.
"Arbitrage, Factor Structure, and Mean-Variance Analysis on Large Asset Markets,"
Econometric Society, vol. 51(5), pages 1281-304, September.
- Chamberlain, Gary & Rothschild, Michael, 1982. "Arbitrage, Factor Structure, and Mean-Variance Analysis on Large Asset Markets," Scholarly Articles 3230355, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Gary Chamberlain & Michael Rothschild, 1982. "Arbitrage, Factor Structure, and Mean-Variance Analysis on Large Asset Markets," NBER Working Papers 0996, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bai, Jushan & Ng, Serena, 2008. "Forecasting economic time series using targeted predictors," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 304-317, October.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:swe:wpaper:2013-04. 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: (Gabriele Gratton)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.