Linear and Non-linear (Non-)Forecastability of High-frequency Exchange Rates

This paper forecasts Daily Sterling exchange rate returns using various naive, linear and non-linear univariate time-series models. The accuracy of the forecasts is evaluated using mean squared error and sign prediction criteria. These show only a very modest improvement over forecasts generated by a random walk model. The Pesaran–Timmerman test and a comparison with forecasts generated artificially shows that even the best models have no evidence of market timing ability.©1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

An assessment of the economic value of non-linear foreign exchange rate forecasts

Recent research suggests that non-linear methods cannot improve the point forecasts of high-frequency exchange rates. These studies have been using standard forecasting criteria such as smallest mean squared error (MSE) and smallest mean absolute error (MAE). It is, however, premature to conclude from this evidence that non-linear forecasts of high-frequency financial returns are economically or statistically insignificant. We prove a proposition which implies that the standard forecasting criteria are not necessarily particularly suited for assessment of the economic value of predictions of non-linear processes where the predicted value and the prediction error may not be independently distributed. Adopting a simple non-linear forecasting procedure to 15 daily exchange rate series we find that although, when compared to simple random walk forecasts, all the non-linear forecasts give a higher MSE and MAE, when applied in a simple trading strategy these forecasts result in a higher mean return. It is also shown that the ranking of portfolio payoffs based on forecasts from a random walk, and linear and non-linear models, is closely related to a non-parametric test of market timing.     

Highest-density forecast regions for nonlinear and non-normal time series models

Forecast regions are a common way to summarize forecast accuracy. They usually consist of an interval symmetric about the forecast mean. However, symmetric intervals may not be appropriate forecast regions when the forecast density is not symmetric and unimodal. With many modern time series models, such as those which are non-linear or have non-normal errors, the forecast densities are often asymmetric or multimodal. The problem of obtaining forecast regions in such cases is considered and it is proposed that highest-density forecast regions be used. A graphical method for presenting the results is discussed.     

Assessing the historical accuracy of regional economic forecasts

This study addresses for the first time systematic evaluation of a widely used class of forecasts, regional economic forecasts. Ex ante regional structural equation model forecasts are analysed for 19 metropolitan areas. One- to ten-quarter-ahead forecasts are considered and the seven-year sample spans a complete business cycle. Counter to previous speculation in the literature, (1) dependency on macroeconomic forecasting model inputs does not substantially erode accuracy relative to univariate extrapolative methodologies and (2) stochastic time series models do not on average, yield more accurate regional economic predictions than structural models. Similar to findings in other studies, clear preferences among extrapolative methodologies do not emerge. Most general conclusions, however, are subject to caveats based on step-length effects and region-specific effects.     

基于PLS及时间序列法的卷烟销量组合预测方法

以A省及17个地市约七年间的销售面板数据为研究对象,首先建立三个单项预测模型,即Hoher—Winter季节乘积模型、时间序列分解法模型和偏最小二乘回归模型。在得到三个单项模型预测值之后,再运用组合模型方法,对三种模型的预测结果进行优化。实证结果显示,本组合预测方法更进一步的提高了预测精度,同时对卷烟销量预测实际工作具有借鉴意义。     

Comparison of forecasting performances: Does normalization and variance stabilization method beat GARCH(1,1)‐type models? Empirical evidence from the stock markets

In this paper, we present a comparison between the forecasting performances of the normalization and variance stabilization method (NoVaS) and the GARCH(1,1), EGARCH(1,1) and GJR‐GARCH(1,1) models. Hence the aim of this study is to compare the out‐of‐sample forecasting performances of the models used throughout the study and to show that the NoVaS method is better than GARCH(1,1)‐type models in the context of out‐of sample forecasting performance. We study the out‐of‐sample forecasting performances of GARCH(1,1)‐type models and NoVaS method based on generalized error distribution, unlike normal and Student's t‐distribution. Also, what makes the study different is the use of the return series, calculated logarithmically and arithmetically in terms of forecasting performance. For comparing the out‐of‐sample forecasting performances, we focused on different datasets, such as S&P 500, logarithmic and arithmetic B?ST 100 return series. The key result of our analysis is that the NoVaS method performs better out‐of‐sample forecasting performance than GARCH(1,1)‐type models. The result can offer useful guidance in model building for out‐of‐sample forecasting purposes, aimed at improving forecasting accuracy.     

When are Direct Multi‐step and Iterative Forecasts Identical?

Although both direct multi‐step‐ahead forecasting and iterated one‐step‐ahead forecasting are two popular methods for predicting future values of a time series, it is not clear that the direct method is superior in practice, even though from a theoretical perspective it has lower mean squared error (MSE). A given model can be fitted according to either a multi‐step or a one‐step forecast error criterion, and we show here that discrepancies in performance between direct and iterative forecasting arise chiefly from the method of fitting, and is dictated by the nuances of the model's misspecification. We derive new formulas for quantifying iterative forecast MSE, and present a new approach for assessing asymptotic forecast MSE. Finally, the direct and iterative methods are compared on a retail series, which illustrates the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

System-based weights versus series-specific weights in the combination of forecasts

System-based combination weights for series r/step-length h incorporate relative accuracy information from other forecast step-lengths for r and from other series for step-length h. Such weights are examined utilizing the West and Fullerton (1996) data set-4275 ex ante employment forecasts from structural simultaneous equation econometric models for 19 metropolitan areas at 10 quarterly step-lengths and a parallel set of 4275 ARIMA forecasts. The system-based weights yielded combined forecasts of higher average accuracy and lower risk of large inaccuracy than seven alternative strategies: (1) averaging; (2) relative MSE weights; (3) outperformance (per cent best) weights; (4) Bates and Granger (1969) optimal weights with a convexity constraint imposed; (5) unconstrained optimal weights; (6) select a ‘best’ method (ex ante) by series and; (7) experiment in the Bischoff (1989) sense and select either method (2) or (6) based on the outcome of e experiment. Accuracy gains of the system-based combination were concentrated at step-lengths two to five. Although alternative (5) was generally outperformed, none of the six other alternatives was systematically most accurate when evaluated relative to each other. This contrasts with Bischoff's (1989) results that held promise for an empirically applicable guideline to determine whether or not to combine.