1 Ka-fu Wong University of Hong Kong Volatility Measurement, Modeling, and Forecasting
Dec 20, 2015
1
Ka-fu WongUniversity of Hong Kong
Volatility Measurement,Modeling, and Forecasting
2
Importance of volatility
Good volatility forecasts are crucial for the implementation and evaluation of asset and derivative pricing theories as well as trading and hedging strategies.
Two assets: an risky and a riskless (i.e., volatility = 0) Risky asset generally has a higher expected return than
the riskless assets.
We would like to invest in a portfolio consisting of the two assets. When the risky asset has a very high volatility, the
portfolio will consist of the riskless asset only. When the risky asset has a very low volatility, the
portfolio will consist of more risky assets.
3
Importance of volatility
The variance of inflation may have impact on various macro and investment decisions.
High variance in inflation may also imply welfare loss.
Previous studies have tried to measure the time-varying variance of inflation.
4
Clustering of volatility
It is a well-established fact, dating back to Mandelbrot (1963) and Fama (1965), that financial returns display pronounced volatility clustering.
Therefore, models of volatility should allow such clustering.
5
Example: AR(1)
yt = φ yt-1 + t t ~ WN(0, 2)AR(1):
yt = φ (φ yt-2 + t-1) + t
= φ2 yt-2 + φ t-1 + t
= φ2 (φ yt-3 +t-2)+ φ t-1 + t
= φ3 yt-3 + φ2 t-2+ φ t-1 + t
= t + φt-1 + φ2t-2 + φ3t-3 + φ4t-4 + φ5t-5+ …
…
E(t) = 0, E(yt) = 0
Var(t) = E[(t – E(t))2] = 2
Var(yt) = E[(yt – E(yt))2] = 2(1+ φ + φ2 + φ3 + φ4 +…)
Repeatd substitution:
6
Homoskedasticity vs. Heteroskedasticity
So far, innovation are assumed to be i.i.d.
It is possible to allow variance to change across observations, i.e., Heteroskedasticity.
Information available at time t-1
7
A general linear process
Consider a general linear process:
Need not be i.i.d.
8
Two examples
Consider a general linear process:
Need not be i.i.d.
yt = φ yt-1 + t
yt = t + φt-1 + φ2t-2 + φ3t-3 + φ4t-4 + …
bi = φi
AR(1)
MA(2)
yt = t + θ1t-1 + θ 2t-2
b0=1, b1= θ1, b2= θ2, b3=b4=…=0
9
b0=1, b1= θ1, b2= θ2, b3=b4=…=0
Unconditional means and variances
Consider a general linear process:
yt = φ yt-1 + t
yt = t + φt-1 + φ2t-2 + φ3t-3 + φ4t-4 + …
bi = φi
AR(1)
yt = t + θ1t-1 + θ 2t-2
MA(2)
E(yt)= E(t) + φE(t-1) + φ2E(t-2) + … = 0
V(yt)= V(t) + φ2V(t-1) + φ4V(t-2) + …
E(yt)= E(t) + θ1E(t-1) + θ2E(t-2) = 0
V(yt)= V(t) + θ12V(t-1) + θ2
2V(t-2)
10
Conditional variances change with horizon of forecast but are not time-varying given a horizon.
Consider a general linear process:
Conditional mean is time-varying :
h-step ahead forecast is time-varying:
Conditional information
b0=1, b1= θ1, b2= θ2, b3=b4=…=0
yt = t + θ1t-1 + θ 2t-2
MA(2)
E(yt|t-1)= θ1t-1 + θ2t-2
E(yt+1|t)= θ1t + θ2t-1
E(yt+2|t+1)= θ1t+1 + θ2t
11
Conditional variances change with horizon of forecast but are not time-varying given a horizon.
Consider a general linear process:
Conditional variance is not time-varying:
Conditional prediction error variance:
Conditional information
b0=1, b1= θ1, b2= θ2, b3=b4=…=0
yt = t + θ1t-1 + θ 2t-2
MA(2)
E[(yt-E(yt|t-1) )2|t-1]= E(t
2 |t-1) = 2
Non-time-varying!
12
ARCH(p) process
Examples:(1)ARCH(1): t
2 = + 1 t-12
(2) ARCH(2): t2 = + 1 t-1
2+ 2 t-22
ARCH(p)
AutoRegressive Conditional Heteroskedasticy of order p
13
ARCH(p) process
Examples:(1)ARCH(1): t
2 = + 1 t-12
(2) ARCH(2): t2 = + 1 t-1
2+ 2 t-22
ARCH implies volatility clustering. That is, large changes tend to be followed by large changes and small by small, of either sign.
14
ARCH(p) process
Examples:(1)ARCH(1): t
2 = + 1 t-12
(2) ARCH(2): t2 = + 1 t-1
2+ 2 t-22
(1) Unconditional mean
(2) Unconditional variance
(3) Conditional variance
Some properties
15
ARCH(1)
t2 = + 1 t-1
2
Note that E[t
2] = E[ E(t2|t-1) ] = E(t
2) = 2
E[(t-E(t))2] = ?
E[t2] = + 1 E[t-1
2]
2 = + 1 2
2 = / (1- 1)
16
How to simulation ARCH(1)?
Suppose we are interested in generating T observations of t that has the property of ARCH(1). t ~ N(0,t
2), wheret2 = + 1 t-1
2
(1) Fixed the parameters. Compute the unconditional variance of t.
2 = / (1- 1)
(2) Generate T+1 observations of standard normal random variables, v0, v1, …., vT
(3) Generate t recursively
For t=0, t2 = 2, t = vt t
For t=1, t2 = + 1 t-1
2, and t = vt t
For t=2, t2 = + 1 t-1
2, and t = vt t
17
The inflation example of Engle (1982)
First difference of the log of the quarterly consumer price index
log of the quarterly manual wage rates
Lagged 4 periods
Engle, Robert F. (1982): “Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation,” Econometrica, 50(4): 987-1007.
18
The inflation example of Engle (1982)OLS regression
Restriction imposed.
19
The inflation example of Engle (1982)ML estimation with ARCH(1)
The ARCH model comes closer to truly random residuals afterstandardizing for their conditional distributions.
20
GARCH(p,q)
Backward substitution on t2 yields
A infinite-order ARCH process with some restriction in the coefficients.(Analogy: An ARMA(p,q) process can be written as MA(∞) process.)
GARCH can be viewed as a parsimonious way to approximate a high order ARCH process
21
Important properties of GARCH(p,q)(1) Unconditional variance is fixed but conditional variance is time-varying
22
Important properties of GARCH(p,q)(2) Unconditional distribution of conditionally Gaussian GARCH is symmetric and leptokurtic.
Real-world financial asset returns, are often found to symmetrically distributed and have a fatter tail than Gaussian distribution.
Ordinary Gaussian distribution does not provide a good approximation of the asset returns, but the Gaussian distribution with GARCH does.
23
Important properties of GARCH(p,q)(3) Conditional prediction error variance varies with conditional information set.
unbiased forecast
Conditional variance of the prediction error
Conditional variance approaches unconditional variance
24
Important properties of GARCH(p,q)(3) t follows GARCH implies t
2 follows an ARMA .
25
Extension of ARCH and GARCH ModelsThreshold GARCH
When the lagged return is positive (good news yesterday), D=0, so the effect of the lagged squared return on the current conditional variance is simply .
When the lagged return is negative (negative news yesterday), D=1, so the effect of the lagged squared return on the current conditional variance is simply .
Allowance for asymmetric response has proved useful for modeling “leverage effects” in stock returns, which occur when < 0.
26
Extension of ARCH and GARCH Modelsexponential GARCH
Volatility is drive by both the size and sign of shocks (both positive and negative). Hence, the model allows for asymmetric response depending on the sign of news.
When the shock is positive, the impact of (t-1/t-1) on ln(t2) is
+ When the shock is negative, the impact of (t-1/t-1) on ln(t
2) is +
27
Extension of ARCH and GARCH ModelsGARCH with exogenous variables
Financial market volume, for example, often helps to explain market volatility.
28
Extension of ARCH and GARCH ModelsGARCH-in-Mean (i.e., GARCH-M)
High risk, high return.
Conditional mean regression
29
Estimating, Forecasting, and Diagnosing GARCH Models
Diagnostic: Estimate the model without GARCH in the usual way. Look at the time series properties of the squared residuals.
Correlogram, AIC, SIC, etc. ARMA(1,1) in the squared residuals implies GARCH(1,1).
30
Estimating, Forecasting, and Diagnosing GARCH Models
Estimation: Usually use maximum likelihood with the assumption of normal distribution. Maximum likelihood estimation finds the parameter values
that maximize the likelihood function
Forecast: In financial applications, volatility forecasts are often of direct interest.
1-step-ahead conditional variance
Better forecast confidence interval
vs.
31
Application: Stock Market Volatility
Objective: Model and forecast the volatility of daily returns on the New York Stock Exchange
Data: Daily returns on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)
form January 1, 1988, through December 31, 2001. Excluding holidays, there are 3531 observations.
Estimation: 1-3461 Forecast: 3462-3531.
32
Time Series Plot, NYSE Returns
33
Histogram and Related Diagnostic Statistics, NYSE Returns
34
Correlogram, NYSE Returns
35
Time Series Plot, Squared NYSE Returns
36
Correlogram, Squared NYSE Returns
37
AR(5) Model, Squared NYSE Returns
38
ARCH(5) Model, NYSE Returns
39
Correlogram, Squared Standardized ARCH(5) residuals, NYSE Returns
40
GARCH(1,1) Model, NYSE Returns
t-12
t-12
41
Correlogram, Squared Standardized GARCH(1,1) residuals, NYSE Returns
42
Estimated Conditional Standard Deviation, GARCH(1,1) Model, NYSE Returns
43
Estimated Conditional Standard Deviation, Exponential Smoothing, NYSE Returns
44
Conditional Standard Deviation, History and Forecast, GARCH(1,1) Model
45
Conditional Standard Deviation, Extended History and Extended Forecast, GARCH(1,1) Model
46
Is GARCH(1,1) enough most of the time?
330 GARCH-type models are compared in terms of their ability to forecast the one-day-ahead conditional variance.
The models are evaluated out-of-sample using six different loss functions, where the realized variance is substituted for the latent conditional variance.
Hansen, Peter R. and Asger Lunde (2005): “A Forecast Comparison Of Volatility Models: Does Anything Beat A GARCH(1,1)?” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20: 873-889.
47
Is GARCH(1,1) enough most of the time?
Data: DM–$ spot exchange rate data,
the estimation sample spans the period from October 1, 1987 through September 30, 1992 (1254 observations) and
the out-of-sample evaluation sample spans the period from October 1, 1992 through September 30, 1993 (n = 260).
IBM stock returns, the estimation period spans the period from January
2, 1990 through May 28, 1999 (2378 days) and the evaluation period spans the period from June 1,
1999 through May 31, 2000 (n = 254).
48
Specifications of the conditional variance
49
Loss functions for forecast evaluation
MSE2 and R2Log are similar to R2 of the MZ regressions.
50
The test
Giving benefits of the doubt to the benchmark, i.e., GARCH(1,1).
Loss of GARCH(1,1)
Loss of alternatiave GARCH models.
The maintained hypothesis is that GARCH(1,1) is better unless there is strong evidence against it.
51
Superior Predictive Ability and Reality Check for data snooping
52
The test resultssuperior predictive ability (SPA)
53
IBM data:superior predictive ability and reality check for data snooping
54
Does Anything Beat A GARCH(1,1)?
No. So, use GARCH(1,1) if no other information is available.
55
End