A Comparative Study on the Forecasting Performance of Range Volatility Estimators using KOSPI 200 Tick Data
0
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study is on the forecasting performance analysis of range volatility estimators(Parkinson, Garman and Klass, and Rogers and Satchell) relative to historical one using two-scale realized volatility estimator as a benchmark. American sub-prime mortgage loan shock to Korean stock markets happened in sample period(January 2, 2006～March 10, 2008), so the structural change somewhere within this period can make a huge influence on the results. Therefore sample was divided into two sub-samples by May 30, 2007 according to Zivot and Andrews unit root test results. As expected, the second sub-sample was much more volatile than the first sub-sample. As a result of forecasting performance analysis, Rogers and Satchell volatility estimator showed the best forecasting performance in the full sample and relatively better forecasting performance than other estimators in sub-samples. Range volatility estimators showed better forecasting performance than historical volatility estimator during the period before the outbreak of structural change(the first sub-sample). On the contrary, the forecasting performance of range volatility estimators couldn’t beat that of historical volatility estimator during the period after this event(the second sub-sample). The main culprit of this result seems to be the increment of range volatility caused by that of intraday volatility after structural change.
Abstract
This study is on the forecasting performance analysis of range volatility estimators(Parkinson, Garman and Klass, and Rogers and Satchell) relative to historical one using two-scale realized volatility estimator as a benchmark. American sub-prime mortgage loan shock to Korean stock markets happened in sample period(January 2, 2006～March 10, 2008), so the structural change somewhere within this period can make a huge influence on the results. Therefore sample was divided into two sub-samples by May 30, 2007 according to Zivot and Andrews unit root test results. As expected, the second sub-sample was much more volatile than the first sub-sample. As a result of forecasting performance analysis, Rogers and Satchell volatility estimator showed the best forecasting performance in the full sample and relatively better forecasting performance than other estimators in sub-samples. Range volatility estimators showed better forecasting performance than historical volatility estimator during the period before the outbreak of structural change(the first sub-sample). On the contrary, the forecasting performance of range volatility estimators couldn’t beat that of historical volatility estimator during the period after this event(the second sub-sample). The main culprit of this result seems to be the increment of range volatility caused by that of intraday volatility after structural change.
참고문헌 (20)
- Anderson, T. G, "Answering the Skeptics：Yes, Standard Volatility Models do provide Accurate Forecasts", International Economic Review, 39, pp.885~905 (1998)
- Anderson, T. G, "The Distribution of Exchange Rate Volatility", Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96, pp.42~55 (2001)
- Anderson, T. G, "Parametric and Nonparametric Volatility Measurement", NBER working paper, 279 (2002)
- Andreou, E, "Rolling-Sample Volatility Estimators：Some New Theoretical Simulation and Empirical Results", Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 20, pp.363~376 (2002)
- Bali, T. G, "A Comparative Study of Alternative Extreme-Value Volatility Estimators", Journal of Futures Markets, 25, pp.873~892 (2005)
- Barndorff-Nielsen, O. E, "Econometric Analysis of Realized Volatility and its Use in Estimating Stochastic Volatility Models", Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, 64, pp.253~280 (2002)
- Brown, S. J, "Estimating Volatility, in Financial Options：From Theory to Practice", pp.516~537 (1990), Business-One- Irwin
- Diebold, F. X, "Comparing Predictive Accuracy", Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 13, pp.253~263 (1995)
- Garman, M. B, "On the Estimation of Security Price Volatilities from Historical Data", Journal of Business, 53, pp.67~78 (1980)
- MacKinnon, J. G, "Numerical Distribution Functions for Unit Root and Cointegration Tests", Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11, pp.601~618 (1996)
- Marsh, T. A, "Non-trading, market making, and Estimates of Stock Price Volatility", Journal of Financial Economics, 15, pp.359~372 (2003)
- Parkinson, M, "The Extreme-Value Method for Estimating the Variance of the Rate of Return", Journal of Business, 53, pp.61~65 (1980)
- Rogers, L. C. G, "Estimating Variance from High, Low and Closing Prices", Annals of Applied Probability, 1, pp.504~512 (1991)
- Shu, J, "Testing Range Estimators of Historical Volatility", Journal of Futures Markets, 26, pp.297~313 (2006)
- Shrestha, M. B, "A Sequential Procedure for Testing Unit Roots in the presence of Structural Break in Time Series Data：an Application to Quarterly Data in Nepal 1970～2003", International Journal of Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, 2, pp.1~16 (2005)
- Vipul, "Forecasting Performance of Extreme-Value Volatility Estimators", Journal of Futures Markets, 27, pp.1085~1105 (2007)
- Wiggins, J. B, "Empirical Tests of the Bias and Efficiency of the Extreme-Value Variance Estimator for Common Stocks", Journal of Business, 64, pp.417~432 (1991)
- Wiggins, J. B, "Estimating the Volatility of S&P 500 Futures Prices using the Extreme-Value Method", Journal of Futures Markets, pp.265~273 (1992)
- Zhang, L, "A Tale of Two Time Scales： Determining Integrated Volatility with Noisy High-Frequency Data", Journal of American Statistical Association, 100, pp.1394~1411 (2005)
- Zivot, E, "Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis", Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 10, pp.251~270 (1992)