How well do analysts forecast interest rates?

This paper examines interest rate forecasts made for the period 1982–90 and examines three issues: (1) Is there a general agreement among analysts about the level of interest rates six months in the future? (2) Are all the forecasters equally good? (3) Are the forecasts valuable to prospective users? We use distributions of the cross-sections of forecasts, Friedman's statistic for analysis of variance by rank, and tests of independence between forecasts and outcomes to examine these questions. We conclude that there usually was a consensus among analysts, that there was no significant difference in the ability to forecast short-term rates but there was a difference with respect to the long-term predictions, and that these forecasts were not significantly better than random walk forecasts.     

Estimating private information usage amongst analysts: evidence from UK earnings forecasts

This paper introduces a methodology for estimating the likelihood of private information usage amongst earnings analysts. This is achieved by assuming that one group of analysts generate forecasts based on the underlying dynamics of earnings, while all other analysts are assumed to issue forecasts based on the prevailing consensus forecast. Given this behavioural dichotomy, we are able to derive (and estimate) a structural econometric model of forecast behaviour, which has implications regarding the determinants of analysts' private information endowments and forecast accuracy over the forecast horizon. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Overreaction in Survey Exchange Rate Forecasts

We use survey data on five bilateral exchange rates to provide empirical evidence of the fact that professional forecasters of foreign exchange rates behave irrationally, in the specific sense that they respond inaccurately to available information in the market when forming their predictions. In particular, we find systematic biases in the forecasts resulting in the overreaction of analysts to past information contained in the exchange rate dynamics: forecasters change their prediction more than it would be rational on the basis of past realized changes. In addition, forecasters are heterogeneous in their irrationality: low performers in previous periods show a more pronounced overreaction effect. This can be read as an indication of perpetration of past errors and continued inability to learn from the past. In the second part of the paper, we exploit the novel structure of our dataset, which consists of survey data extracted from the Bloomberg platform and readily available to anyone. This feature allows us to consider their own and others' past forecasts as part of the information set that analysts use in making their predictions. By using past forecasts as proxies for relevant macroeconomic variables, we find evidence that analysts fail to correctly process not only the information contained in the spot rate past dynamics but also the information in this broader set. We see this as confirmation of the existence of inefficiency and heterogeneity between low and high performers also when full information is available. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Forecast Combination for Euro Area Inflation: A Cure in Times of Crisis?

The period of extraordinary volatility in euro area headline inflation starting in 2007 raised the question whether forecast combination methods can be used to hedge against bad forecast performance of single models during such periods and provide more robust forecasts. We investigate this issue for forecasts from a range of short‐term forecasting models. Our analysis shows that there is considerable variation of the relative performance of the different models over time. To take that into account we suggest employing performance‐based forecast combination methods—in particular, one with more weight on the recent forecast performance. We compare such an approach with equal forecast combination that has been found to outperform more sophisticated forecast combination methods in the past, and investigate whether it can improve forecast accuracy over the single best model. The time‐varying weights assign weights to the economic interpretations of the forecast stemming from different models. We also include a number of benchmark models in our analysis. The combination methods are evaluated for HICP headline inflation and HICP excluding food and energy. We investigate how forecast accuracy of the combination methods differs between pre‐crisis times, the period after the global financial crisis and the full evaluation period, including the global financial crisis with its extraordinary volatility in inflation. Overall, we find that forecast combination helps hedge against bad forecast performance and that performance‐based weighting outperforms simple averaging. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Estimation and Prediction Tests of Cash Flow Forecast Accuracy

Recently, analysts' cash flow forecasts have become widely available through financial information services. Cash flow information enables practitioners to better understand the real operating performance and financial stability of a company, particularly when earnings information is noisy and of low quality. However, research suggests that analysts' cash flow forecasts are less accurate and more dispersed than earnings forecasts. We thus investigate factors influencing cash flow forecast accuracy and build a practical model to distinguish more accurate from less accurate cash flow forecasters, using past cash flow forecast accuracy and analyst characteristics. We find significant power in our cash flow forecast accuracy prediction models. We also find that analysts develop cash flow‐specific forecasting expertise and knowhow, which are distinct from those that analysts acquire from forecasting earnings. In particular, cash flow‐specific information is more useful in identifying accurate cash flow forecasters than earnings‐specific information.Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Expectations,use and judgmental adjustment of external financial and economic forecasts: an empirical investigation

A survey of 124 users of externally produced financial and economic forecasts in Turkey investigated their expectations and perceptions of forecast quality and their reasons for judgmentally adjusting forecasts. Expectations and quality perceptions mainly related to the timeliness of forecasts, the provision of a clear justifiable rationale and accuracy. Cost was less important. Forecasts were frequently adjusted when they lacked a justifiable explanation, when the user felt they could integrate their knowledge into the forecast, or where the user perceived a need to take responsibility for the forecast. Forecasts were less frequently adjusted when they came from a well‐known source and were based on sound explanations and assumptions. The presence of feedback on accuracy reduced the influence of these factors. The seniority and experience of users had little effect on their attitudes or propensity to make adjustments. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The accuracy of individual and group forecasts from business outlook surveys

This paper reports on the accuracy of quarterly multiperiod predictions of inflation, real growth, unemployment and percentage changes in nominal GNP and two of its more volatile components. The survey data are highly differentiated; they cover 79 professional forecasters (mostly economists, analysts and corporate executives). Combining corresponding predictions from different sources can result in significant gains; thus the group mean forecasts are on the average over time more accurate than most of the corresponding sets of individual forecasts. But there is also a moderate degree of consistency in the relative performance of a sufficient number of the survey members, as evidenced in positive rank correlations among ratios of the individual to group root mean square errors.     

Relative accuracy of judgemental and extrapolative methods in forecasting annual earnings

This paper identifies and analyses previously published studies on annual earnings forecasts. Comparisons of forecasts produced by management, analysts, and extrapolative techniques indicated that: (1) management forecasts were superior to professional analyst forecasts (the mean absolute percentage errors were 15.9 and 17.7, respectively, based on five studies using data from 1967–1974) and (2) judgemental forecasts (both management and analysts) were superior to extrapolation forecasts on 14 of 17 comparisons from 13 studies using data from 1964–1979 (the mean absolute percentage errors were 21.0 and 28.4 for judgement and extrapolation, respectively). These conclusions, based on recent research, differ from those reported in previous reviews, which commented on less than half of the studies identified here.     

Professional economic forecasts: Are they worth their costs?

Most economic forecast evaluations dating back 20 years show that professional forecasters add little to the forecasts generated by the simplest of models. Using various types of forecast error criteria, these evaluations usually conclude that the professional forecasts are little better than the no-change or ARIM A type forecast. It is our contention that this conclusion is mistaken because the conventional error criteria may not capture why forecasts are ma& or how they are used. Using forecast directional accuracy, the criterion which has been found to be highly correlated with profits in an interest rate setting, we find that professional GNP forecasts dominate the cheaper alternatives. Moreover, there appears to be no systematic relationship between this preferred criterion and the error measures used in previous studies.     

Revisions in analysts' earnings forecasts: evidence of non‐linear adaptive expectations

Prior studies use a linear adaptive expectations model to describe how analysts revise their forecasts of future earnings in response to current forecast errors. However, research shows that extreme forecast errors are less likely than small forecast errors to persist in future years. If analysts recognize this property, their marginal forecast revisions should decrease with the forecast error's magnitude. Therefore, a linear model is likely to be unsatisfactory at describing analysts' forecast revisions. We find that a non‐linear model better describes the relation between analysts' forecast revisions and their forecast errors, and provides a richer theoretical framework for explaining analysts' forecasting behaviour. Our results are consistent with analysts' recognizing the permanent and temporary nature of forecast errors of differing magnitudes. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The accuracy of IMF and OECD forecasts for G7 countries

This paper analyses the size and nature of the errors in GDP forecasts in the G7 countries from 1971 to 1995. These GDP short‐term forecasts are produced by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and by the International Monetary Fund, and published twice a year in the Economic Outlook and in the World Economic Outlook, respectively. The evaluation of the accuracy of the forecasts is based on the properties of the difference between the realization and the forecast. A forecast is considered to be accurate if it is unbiased and efficient. A forecast is unbiased if its average deviation from the outcome is zero, and it is efficient if it reflects all the information that is available at the time the forecast is made. Finally, we also examine tests of directional accuracy and offer a non‐parametric method of assessment. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Are Analysts' Loss Functions Asymmetric?

Despite displaying a statistically significant optimism bias, analysts' earnings forecasts are an important input to investors’ valuation models. Understanding the possible reasons for any bias is important if information is to be extracted from earnings forecasts and used optimally by investors. Extant research into the shape of analysts' loss functions explains optimism bias as resulting from analysts minimizing the mean absolute forecast error under symmetric, linear loss functions. When the distribution of earnings outcomes is skewed, optimalforecasts can appear biased. In contrast, research into analysts' economic incentives suggests that positive and negative earnings forecast errors made by analysts are not penalized or rewarded symmetrically, suggesting that asymmetric loss functions are an appropriate characterization. To reconcile these findings, we exploit results from economic theory relating to the Linex loss function to discriminate between the symmetric linear loss and the asymmetric loss explanations of analyst forecast bias. Under asymmetric loss functions optimal forecasts will appear biased even if earnings outcomes are symmetric. Our empirical results support the asymmetric loss function explanation. Further analysis also reveals that forecast bias varies systematically across firm characteristics that capture systematic variation in the earnings forecast error distribution. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do IMF fiscal forecasts add value?

We used a panel of 29 advanced and emerging market countries to investigate whether the IMF's World Economic Outlook (WEO) fiscal forecasts add value in terms of forecast accuracy and information content, relative to private sector forecasts (from Consensus Economics). We find that: (i) WEO forecasts are not significantly less accurate than Consensus forecasts; (ii) WEO and Consensus forecasts tend to mutually encompass one another; and (iii) each source of forecasts appears to contain some information that is not embedded in the other source.     

Forecasting volatility

In this paper, we investigate the time series properties of S&P 100 volatility and the forecasting performance of different volatility models. We consider several nonparametric and parametric volatility measures, such as implied, realized and model‐based volatility, and show that these volatility processes exhibit an extremely slow mean‐reverting behavior and possible long memory. For this reason, we explicitly model the near‐unit root behavior of volatility and construct median unbiased forecasts by approximating the finite‐sample forecast distribution using bootstrap methods. Furthermore, we produce prediction intervals for the next‐period implied volatility that provide important information about the uncertainty surrounding the point forecasts. Finally, we apply intercept corrections to forecasts from misspecified models which dramatically improve the accuracy of the volatility forecasts. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Judgmental adjustment of earnings forecasts

Earnings forecasts have received a great deal of attention, much of which has centered on the comparative accuracy of judgmental and objective forecasting methods. Recently, studies have focused on the use of combinations of subjective and objective forecasts to improve forecast accuracy. This research offers an extension on this theme by subjectively modifying an objective forecast. Specifically, ARIMA forecasts are judgmentally adjusted by analysts using a structured approach based on Saaty's (1980) analytic hierarchy process. The results show that the accuracy of the unadjusted objective forecasts can be improved when judgmentally adjusted.     

Forecast accuracy and effort: The case of US inflation rates

This paper investigates the relationship between forecast accuracy and effort, where effort is defined as the number of times the model used to generate forecasts is recursively estimated over the full sample period. More specifically, within a framework of costly effort, optimal effort strategies are derived under the assumption that the dynamics of the variable of interest follow an autoregressive‐type process. Results indicate that the strategies are fairly robust over a wide range of linear and nonlinear processes (including structural break processes), and deliver forecasts of transitory, core and total inflation that require less effort to generate and are as accurate as (that is, are insignificantly different from) those produced with maximum effort. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Financial density forecasts: A comprehensive comparison of risk‐neutral and historical schemes

We investigate the forecasting ability of the most commonly used benchmarks in financial economics. We approach the usual caveats of probabilistic forecasts studies—small samples, limited models, and nonholistic validations—by performing a comprehensive comparison of 15 predictive schemes during a time period of over 21 years. All densities are evaluated in terms of their statistical consistency, local accuracy and forecasting errors. Using a new composite indicator, the integrated forecast score, we show that risk‐neutral densities outperform historical‐based predictions in terms of information content. We find that the variance gamma model generates the highest out‐of‐sample likelihood of observed prices and the lowest predictive errors, whereas the GARCH‐based GJR‐FHS delivers the most consistent forecasts across the entire density range. In contrast, lognormal densities, the Heston model, or the nonparametric Breeden–Litzenberger formula yield biased predictions and are rejected in statistical tests.     

Combining multivariate volatility forecasts using weighted losses

The ability to improve out-of-sample forecasting performance by combining forecasts is well established in the literature. This paper advances this literature in the area of multivariate volatility forecasts by developing two combination weighting schemes that exploit volatility persistence to emphasise certain losses within the combination estimation period. A comprehensive empirical analysis of the out-of-sample forecast performance across varying dimensions, loss functions, sub-samples and forecast horizons show that new approaches significantly outperform their counterparts in terms of statistical accuracy. Within the financial applications considered, significant benefits from combination forecasts relative to the individual candidate models are observed. Although the more sophisticated combination approaches consistently rank higher relative to the equally weighted approach, their performance is statistically indistinguishable given the relatively low power of these loss functions. Finally, within the applications, further analysis highlights how combination forecasts dramatically reduce the variability in the parameter of interest, namely the portfolio weight or beta.     

Mincer–Zarnowitz quantile and expectile regressions for forecast evaluations under aysmmetric loss functions

Forecasts are pervasive in all areas of applications in business and daily life. Hence evaluating the accuracy of a forecast is important for both the generators and consumers of forecasts. There are two aspects in forecast evaluation: (a) measuring the accuracy of past forecasts using some summary statistics, and (b) testing the optimality properties of the forecasts through some diagnostic tests. On measuring the accuracy of a past forecast, this paper illustrates that the summary statistics used should match the loss function that was used to generate the forecast. If there is strong evidence that an asymmetric loss function has been used in the generation of a forecast, then a summary statistic that corresponds to that asymmetric loss function should be used in assessing the accuracy of the forecast instead of the popular root mean square error or mean absolute error. On testing the optimality of the forecasts, it is demonstrated how the quantile regressions set in the prediction–realization framework of Mincer and Zarnowitz (in J. Mincer (Ed.), Economic Forecasts and Expectations: Analysis of Forecasting Behavior and Performance (pp. 14–20), 1969) can be used to recover the unknown parameter that controls the potentially asymmetric loss function used in generating the past forecasts. Finally, the prediction–realization framework is applied to the Federal Reserve's economic growth forecast and forecast sharing in a PC manufacturing supply chain. It is found that the Federal Reserve values overprediction approximately 1.5 times more costly than underprediction. It is also found that the PC manufacturer weighs positive forecast errors (under forecasts) about four times as costly as negative forecast errors (over forecasts).     

A comparative evaluation of objective and subjective weather forecasts in the united states

This paper is concerned primarily with the evaluation and comparison of objective and subjective weather forecasts. Operational forecasts of three weather elements are considered: (1) probability forecasts of precipitation occurrence, (2) categorical (i.e. non-probabilistic) forecasts of maximum and minimum temperatures and (3) categorical forecasts of cloud amount. The objective forecasts are prepared by numerical-statistical procedures, whereas the subjective forecasts are based on the judgements of individual forecasters. In formulating the latter, the forecasters consult information from a variety of sources, including the objective forecasts themselves. The precipitation probability forecasts are found to be both reliable and skilful, and evaluation of the temperature/cloud amount forecasts reveals that they are quite accurate/skilful. Comparison of the objective and subjective forecasts of precipitation occurrence indicates that the latter are generally more skilful than the former for shorter lead times (e.g. 12–24 hours), whereas the two types of forecasts are of approximately equal skill for longer lead times (e.g. 36–48 hours). Similar results are obtained for the maximum and minimum temperature forecasts. Objective cloud amount forecasts are more skilful than subjective cloud amount forecasts for all lead times. Examination of trends in performance over the last decade reveals that both types of forecasts for all three elements increased in skill (or accuracy) over the period, with improvements in objective forecasts equalling or exceeding improvements in subjective forecasts. The role and impact of the objective forecasts in the subjective weather forecasting process are discussed in some detail. The need to conduct controlled experiments and other studies of this process, with particular reference to the assimilation of information from different sources, is emphasized. Important characteristics of the forecasting system in meteorology are identified, and they are used to describe similarities and differences between weather forecasting and forecasting in other fields. Acquisition of some of these characteristics may be beneficial to other forecasting systems.