VOLATILITY FORECASTS,TRADING VOLUME,AND THE ARCH VERSUS OPTION‐IMPLIED VOLATILITY TRADE‐OFF

We investigate empirically the role of trading volume (1) in predicting the relative informativeness of volatility forecasts produced by autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) models versus the volatility forecasts derived from option prices, and (2) in improving volatility forecasts produced by ARCH and option models and combinations of models. Daily and monthly data are explored. We find that if trading volume was low during period t?1 relative to the recent past, ARCH is at least as important as options for forecasting future stock market volatility. Conversely, if volume was high during period t?1 relative to the recent past, option‐implied volatility is much more important than ARCH for forecasting future volatility. Considering relative trading volume as a proxy for changes in the set of information available to investors, our findings reveal an important switching role for trading volume between a volatility forecast that reflects relatively stale information (the historical ARCH estimate) and the option‐implied forward‐looking estimate.     

Volatility forecasts and at-the-money implied volatility: a multi-component ARCH approach and its relation to market models

This article explores the relationships between several forecasts for the volatility built from multi-scale linear ARCH processes, and linear market models for the forward variance. This shows that the structures of the forecast equations are identical, but with different dependencies on the forecast horizon. The process equations for the forward variance are induced by the process equations for an ARCH model, but postulated in a market model. In the ARCH case, they are different from the usual diffusive type. The conceptual differences between both approaches and their implication for volatility forecasts are analysed. The volatility forecast is compared with the realized volatility (the volatility that will occur between date t and t + ΔT), and the implied volatility (corresponding to an at-the-money option with expiry at t + ΔT). For the ARCH forecasts, the parameters are set a priori. An empirical analysis across multiple time horizons ΔT shows that a forecast provided by an I-GARCH(1) process (one time scale) does not capture correctly the dynamics of the realized volatility. An I-GARCH(2) process (two time scales, similar to GARCH(1,1)) is better, while a long-memory LM-ARCH process (multiple time scales) replicates correctly the dynamics of the implied and realized volatilities and delivers consistently good forecasts for the realized volatility.     

The information content of implied volatilities and model-free volatility expectations: Evidence from options written on individual stocks

We measure the volatility information content of stock options for individual firms using option prices for 149 US firms and the S&P 100 index. We use ARCH and regression models to compare volatility forecasts defined by historical stock returns, at-the-money implied volatilities and model-free volatility expectations for every firm. For 1-day-ahead estimation, a historical ARCH model outperforms both of the volatility estimates extracted from option prices for 36% of the firms, but the option forecasts are nearly always more informative for those firms that have the more actively traded options. When the prediction horizon extends until the expiry date of the options, the option forecasts are more informative than the historical volatility for 85% of the firms. However, at-the-money implied volatilities generally outperform the model-free volatility expectations.     

The incremental volatility information in one million foreign exchange quotations

The volatility information found in high-frequency exchange rate quotations and in implied volatilities is compared by estimating ARCH models for DM/$ returns. Reuters quotations are used to calculate five-minute returns and hence hourly and daily estimates of realised volatility that can be included in equations for the conditional variances of hourly and daily returns. The ARCH results show that there is a significant amount of information in five-minute returns that is incremental to options information when estimating hourly variances. The same conclusion is obtained by an out-of-sample comparison of forecasts of hourly realised volatility.     

Combining conditional volatility forecasts using neural networks: an application to the EMS exchange rates

The present paper examines the out-of-sample forecasting performance of four conditional volatility models applied to the European Monetary System (EMS) exchange rates. In order to provide improved volatility forecasts, the four models’ forecasts are combined through simple averaging, an ordinary least squares model, and an artificial neural network. The results support the EGARCH specification especially after the foreign exchange crisis of August 1993. The superiority of the EGARCH model is consistent with the nature of the EMS as a managed float regime. The ANN model performed better during the August 1993 crisis especially in terms of root mean absolute prediction error.     

Are RiskMetrics forecasts good enough? Evidence from 31 stock markets

Academic research has highlighted the inherent flaws within the RiskMetrics model and demonstrated the superiority of the GARCH approach in-sample. However, these results do not necessarily extend to forecasting performance. This paper seeks answer to the question of whether RiskMetrics volatility forecasts are adequate in comparison to those obtained from GARCH models. To answer the question stock index data is taken from 31 international markets and subjected to two exercises, a straightforward volatility forecasting exercise and a Value-at-Risk exceptions forecasting competition. Our results provide some simple answers to the above question. When forecasting volatility of the G7 stock markets the APARCH model, in particular, provides superior forecasts that are significantly different from the RiskMetrics models in over half the cases. This result also extends to the European markets with the APARCH model typically preferred. For the Asian markets the RiskMetrics model performs well, and is only significantly dominated by the GARCH models for one market, although there is evidence that the APARCH model provides a better forecast for the larger Asian markets. Regarding the Value-at-Risk exercise, when forecasting the 1% VaR the RiskMetrics model does a poor job and is typically the worst performing model, again the APARCH model does well. However, forecasting the 5% VaR then the RiskMetrics model does provide an adequate performance. In short, the RiskMetrics model only performs well in forecasting the volatility of small emerging markets and for broader VaR measures.     

Evaluating the Forecast Accuracy of Emerging Market Stock Returns

This paper analyzes the forecast performance of emerging market stock returns using standard autoregressive moving average (ARMA) and more elaborated autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) models. Our results indicate that the ARMA and ARCH specifications generally outperform random walk models. Models that allow for asymmetric shocks to volatility are better for in-sample estimation (threshold autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity for daily returns and exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity for longer periods), and ARMA models are better for out-of-sample forecasts. The results are valid using both U. S. dollar and domestic currencies. Overall, the forecast errors of each Latin American market can be explained by the forecasts of other Latin American markets and Asian markets. The forecast errors of each Asian market can be explained by the forecasts of other Asian markets, but not by Latin American markets. Our predictability results are economically significant and may be useful for portfolio managers to enter or leave the market.     

Refining the Degree of Earnings Surprise: A Comparison of Statistical and Analysts' Forecasts

This paper compares the relative predictive ability of several statistical models with analysts' forecasts. It is one of the first attempts to forecast quarterly earnings using an autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) model. ARCH and autoregressive integrated moving average models are found to be superior statistical forecasting alternatives. The most accurate forecasts overall are provided by analysts. Analysts have both a contemporaneous and timing advantage over statistical models. When the sample is screened on those firms that have the largest structural change in the earnings process, the forecast accuracy of the best statistical models is similar to analysts' predictions.     

Volatility Forecasting in the Hang Seng Index using the GARCH Approach

The aim of this paper is to add to the literature on volatility forecasting using data from the Hong Kong stock market to determine if forecasts from GARCH based models can outperform simple historical averaging models. Overall, unlike previous studies we find that the GARCH models with non-Normal distributions show a robust volatility forecasting performance in comparison to the historical models. The results indicate that although not all models outperform simple historical averaging, the EGARCH based models, with non-normal conditional volatility, tend to produce more accurate out-of-sample forecasts using both standard measures of forecast accuracy and financial loss functions. In addition we test for asymmetric adjustment in the Hang Seng, finding strong evidence of asymmetries due to the domination of financial and property firms in this market.     

Forecasting stock market volatility: Further international evidence

Abstract

This paper evaluates the out-of-sample forecasting accuracy of eleven models for monthly volatility in fifteen stock markets. Volatility is defined as within-month standard deviation of continuously compounded daily returns on the stock market index of each country for the ten-year period 1988 to 1997. The first half of the sample is retained for the estimation of parameters while the second half is for the forecast period. The following models are employed: a random walk model, a historical mean model, moving average models, weighted moving average models, exponentially weighted moving average models, an exponential smoothing model, a regression model, an ARCH model, a GARCH model, a GJR-GARCH model, and an EGARCH model. First, standard (symmetric) loss functions are used to evaluate the performance of the competing models: mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and mean absolute percentage error. According to all of these standard loss functions, the exponential smoothing model provides superior forecasts of volatility. On the other hand, ARCH-based models generally prove to be the worst forecasting models. Asymmetric loss functions are employed to penalize under-/over-prediction. When under-predictions are penalized more heavily, ARCH-type models provide the best forecasts while the random walk is worst. However, when over-predictions of volatility are penalized more heavily, the exponential smoothing model performs best while the ARCH-type models are now universally found to be inferior forecasters.     

Smooth Transition ARCH Models: Estimation and Testing

In this paper, we suggest an extension of the ARCH model, the smooth-transition autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (STARCH) model. STARCH models endogenously allow for time-varying shifts in the parameters of the conditional variance equation. The most general form of the model that we consider is a double smooth-transition model, the STAR-STARCH model, which permits not only the conditional variance, but also the mean, to be a function of a smooth-transition term. The threshold ARCH model, the Markov-ARCH model and the standard ARCH model are special cases of our STARCH model. We also develop Lagrange multiplier tests of the hypothesis that the smooth-transition term in the conditional variance is zero. We apply our STARCH model to excess Treasury bill returns. We find some evidence of a smooth transition in excess returns, but in contrast to previous studies, we find almost no evidence of volatility persistence once we allow for smooth transitions in the conditional variance. Thus, the apparent persistence in the conditional variance reported by many researchers could be a mere statistical artifact. We conduct in-sample tests comparing STARCH models to nested competitors; these suggest that STARCH models hold promise for improved predictions. Finally, we describe further extensions of the STARCH model and suggest issues in finance to which they might profitably be applied.     

中国和台湾地区经济波动的实证研究

本文利用ARCH类模型对中国和台湾地区的实际GDP增长率的波动进行了实证分析,结果表明,中国实际GDP增长率的波动有ARCH效应,并且GARCH模型拟合效果最好,而台湾地区实际GDP增长率的波动没有ARCH效应。这表明中国经济波动率是变化的,实际GDP的增长率是对称的,而台湾地区的GDP的波动率是不变的。     

Forecasting exchange rate volatility: The superior performance of conditional combinations of time series and option implied forecasts

This paper provides empirical evidence that combinations of option implied and time series volatility forecasts that are conditional on current information are statistically superior to individual models, unconditional combinations, and hybrid forecasts. Superior forecasting performance is achieved by both, taking into account the conditional expected performance of each model given current information, and combining individual forecasts. The method used in this paper to produce conditional combinations extends the application of conditional predictive ability tests to select forecast combinations. The application is for volatility forecasts of the Mexican peso–US dollar exchange rate, where realized volatility calculated using intraday data is used as a proxy for the (latent) daily volatility.     

Security analyst superiority relative to univariate time-series models in forecasting quarterly earnings

This paper provides evidence of security analyst (SA) superiority relative to univariate time-series (TS) models in predicting firms' quarterly earnings numbers and shows that SA forecast superiority in our sample is attributable to: (1) better utilization of information existing on the date that TS model forecasts can be initiated, a contemporaneous advantage; and (2) use of information acquired between the date of initiation of TS model forecasts and the date when SA forecasts are published, a timing advantage.     

The Dynamics of Discrete Bid and Ask Quotes

This paper presents an empirical microstructure model of bid and ask quotes that features discreteness, random costs of market making, and ARCH volatility effects. Applied to intraday quotes at 15-minute intervals for Alcoa (a randomly chosen Dow stock), the results show that quote exposure costs contain stochastic components that are persistent and large relative to the deterministic intraday "U" components. Analysis of the filtered estimates of the system suggest that bid and ask costs contain common components, and that these costs reflect risk as proxied by ARCH variance forecasts.     

Measuring and Testing the Impact of News on Volatility

This paper defines the news impact curve which measures how new information is incorporated into volatility estimates. Various new and existing ARCH models including a partially nonparametric one are compared and estimated with daily Japanese stock return data. New diagnostic tests are presented which emphasize the asymmetry of the volatility response to news. Our results suggest that the model by Glosten, Jagannathan, and Runkle is the best parametric model. The EGARCH also can capture most of the asymmetry; however, there is evidence that the variability of the conditional variance implied by the EGARCH is too high.     

Power ARCH modelling of commodity futures data on the London Metal Exchange

A recent addition to the ARCH family of econometric models was introduced by Ding and co-workers wherein the power term by which the data is transformed was estimated within the model rather than being imposed by the researcher. This paper considers the ability of the Power GARCH class of models to capture the stylized features of volatility in a range of commodity futures prices traded on the London Metals Exchange (LME). The results of this procedure suggest that asymmetric effects are not generally present in the LME futures data. Further, unlike stock market data which is well described by the model, futures data is not as well described by the APGARCH model. Nested within the APGARCH model are several other models from the ARCH family. This paper uses the standard log likelihood procedure to conduct pairwise comparisons of the relative merits of each and the results suggest that it is the Taylor GARCH model which performs best.     

Efficiency tests with overlapping data: an application to the currency options market

This paper presents the results of an empirical study into the efficiency of the currency options market. The methodology derives from a simple model often applied to the spot and forward markets for foreign exchange. It relates the historic volatility of the underlying asset to the implied volatility of an option on the underlying at a specified prior time and then proceeds to test obvious hypotheses about the values of the coefficients. The study uses panel regression to address the problem of overlapping data which leads to dependence between observations. It also uses volatility data directly quoted on the market in order to avoid the biases which may occur when ‘backing out’ volatility from specific option pricing models. In general, the evidence rejects the hypothesis that the currency option market is efficient. This suggests that implied volatility is not the best predictor of future exchange rate volatility and should not be used without modification: the models presented in this paper could be a way of producing revised forecasts.     

A multi-horizon comparison of density forecasts for the S&P 500 using index returns and option prices

We compare density forecasts of the S&P 500 index from 1991 to 2004, obtained from option prices and daily and 5-min index returns. Risk-neutral densities are given by using option prices to estimate diffusion and jump-diffusion processes which incorporate stochastic volatility. Three transformations are then used to obtain real-world densities. These densities are compared with historical densities defined by ARCH models. For horizons of two and four weeks the best forecasts are obtained from risk-transformations of the risk-neutral densities, while the historical forecasts are superior for the one-day horizon; our ranking criterion is the out-of-sample likelihood of observed index levels. Mixtures of the real-world and historical densities have higher likelihoods than both components for short forecast horizons.