변동성 모형의 질적 특성에 관한 연구
A Study on the Quality of Volatility Models
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구의 목적은 다양한 분석 방법을 도입한 변동성 모형의 질적 특성 비교하고 평가하는 것을 목표로 한다. 표본자료는 1997년 7월 7일부터 2011년 6월 9일까지의 KOSPI200지수 일별수익률 3509개이며 비교할 모형은 GARCH, EGARCH, EWMA 및 내재변동성 모형이다. 실증분석 결과 예측오차 분석에서는 RMSE 기준으로 비교할 경우 5일, 10일 예측기간은 EGARCH 모형, 20일, 30일 예측기간은 GARCH 모형의 예측오차가 가장 작다. MAE 기준으로 비교할 경우 5일 예측기간은 EGARCH 모형, 10일 예측기간은 EWMA 모형, 20일, 30일 예측기간은 GARCH 모형의 예측오차가 가장 작은 것으로 나타났다. MAPE 기준으로 비교할 경우 모든 예측기간에서 EWMA 모형이 가장 우월한 예측력을 보였다. 정보효과 분석에서는 20일의 예측기간은 내재변동성모형이, 5일과 10일 그리고 30일의 예측기간은 EGARCH 모형이 우월한 것으로 나타났다. 불편성 분석한 결과, EWMA 모형이 10일, 20일, 30일의 예측기간에서 불편성을 갖는 것으로 나타났다. 모형의 직관적 비교가 가능한 Davidson and Mackinnon(1981)의 방법론을 이용하여 변동성 모형을 분석할 경우 5일과 10일 예측기간에서는 EGARCH 모형이, 20일과 30일 예측기간에서는 GARCH 모형이 우월한 예측력을 갖는 것으로 나타났다. 글로벌 금융위기 전후 기간에 대해 Davidson and Mackinnon(1981)의 경합모형 분석 방법을 적용할 경우 금융위기 이전에는 EGARCH 모형이, 반면에 금융위기 이후에는 EGARCH(5일, 10일), GARCH(20일), 내재변동성(30일)의 예측력이 우수한 것으로 분석되었다. 이러한 결과는 각 변동성 모형이 갖는 질적 특성이 다르다는 것을 나타낸다. 즉, 모든 질적 특성에서 가장 우월하고 유일한 변동성 모형은 존재하지 않는것을 나타내는 것이다. 따라서 변동성 모형을 이용할 경우 예측하려는 기간이나 집중하고자 하는 질적 특성을 고려하여 모형을 선별할 필요가 있다
Abstract
This study analyzed the qualitative characteristics of the volatility model based on various analytical standards. In the analysis of prediction errors according to the empirical analysis results, the prediction errors of EVARCH model compared with RMSE standard were found to be least for 5 and 10 days, and those of GARCH model for 20 and 30 days. But comparing with MAE standard, the prediction model of GARCH model was the least in EGARCH model for 5 days, in EWMA for the 10 days, in GARCH model on 20 and 30 days. In cases of comparison with MAPE standard, EWMA showed the most superior prediction performance. In the analysis of information effectiveness, the implied volatility was found to be most superior during the 20 day prediction period and EGARCH model was superior in the forecast period of 5, 10, and 30 day prediction period. In the unbiased analysis, EMWA model was found to have bias in the freedom in the prediction periods of 10, 20 and 30 days. According to the analysis results of volatility model using the methodology of Davidson and Mackinnon which enables the intuitive comparison of the model, EGARCH model had superior prediction in 5 and 10 day prediction periods and GARCH model has superior prediction performance for 20 and 30 days. Compared with RMSE standard, EGARCH model showed the least prediction errors across all prediction days before the global financial crisis. But the prediction errors were least during 20 days in GARCH and for 30 days in the implied volatility. When comparing with MAE standard, while EGARCH and EWMA showed outstanding prediction performances during the period before the financial crisis, the prediction errors were analysed to be least in GARCH model and EGARCH model. When comparing with MAPE standard, while EWMA showed outstanding prediction performances during all prediction days before the financial crisis, the prediction errors were found to be least in GARCH model and EGARCH model in the period after the financial crisis. The implied volatility of the information effectiveness was shown to be highest during the period after the financial crisis but the information effectiveness of EGARCH model was higher. EWMA model, regardless of the period of the financial crisis, showed characteristics of unbiased estimates. Although EGARCH model showed characteristics of unbiased estimates during 20 and 30 estimate days, it did not show these characteristics since the period after the financial crisis. According to the analysis results using methods of Davidson and Mackinnon (1981), EGARCH model showed the most excellent prediction performances in the period before the financial crisis. On the contrary, the prediction of EGARCH (5 and 10 days), GARCH (20days) and implied volatility (30days) were during the period after the financial crisis. These results indicate that the qualitative characteristics of each variability are different. In other words, there is not any volatility model which is unique and superior in all the qualitative characteristics. Therefore, it is necessary to choose a model considering qualitative prediction periods and characteristic to be focused on in case of using the volatility model. Limitations of this study is the assumption of the average equation as AR (1) process to presume GARCH model and EGARCH model. The daily rate of return of KOSPI200 index is affected not only by its time series process but other exogenous variables. Accordingly, it is required to examine which effects are made on prediction of variability when estimating conditional volatility by inputting exogenous variables significantly affecting the mean equations of EGARCH model, commitment to estimate the conditional volatility, we need to look at what any change in the predictive power of the volatility.
참고문헌 (33)
- 강인철, "KOSPI200 주가지수 변동성의 효율적인 예측에 관한 연구", 경영교육연구, 44(44), pp.1~22 (2006), 한국경영교육학회
- 김명직, "주식시장의 변동성 예측 KOSPI변동성지수(KoVIX)의 도입가능성을 중심으로", 증권학회지, 25, pp.229~261 (1999), 한국증권학회
- 김명직, "금융시계열분석" (2003), 경문사
- 박동규, "시계열분석에 의한 주식수익률 변동성의 예측", 재무관리연구, 9(2), pp.343~367 (1992), 한국재무관리학회
- 엄영호, "변동성지수의 미래예측력에 대한 연구", 금융연구, 22(3), pp.1~33 (2008), 한국금융학회
- 유시용, "KOSPI200 실현변동성 예측력 제고에 관한 연구", 선물연구, 17(1), pp.21~49 (2009), 한국파생상품학회
- 이재하, "KOSPI200 옵션 내재변동성의 예측력", 선물연구, 9(1), pp.25~50 (2001), 한국파생상품학회
- 이종원, "계량경제학" (2007), 박영사
- 이호, "변동성 모형 적합성과 표본외 VaR의 예측성과", 재무관리연구, 28(2), pp.115~148 (2011), 한국재무관리학회
- 이홍재, "금융경제 시계열 분석" (2005), 경문사
- 장국현, "한국 옵션시장의 변동성 예측과 예측성과 비교에 관한 연구", 선물연구, 9(1), pp.51~79 (2001), 한국파생상품학회
- 조담, "주식의 변동성 추정방법이 VaR에 미치는 영향", 선물연구, 12(2), pp.1~24 (2004), 한국파생상품학회
- 조담, "금융계량분석" (2006), 도서출판 청람
- 허화, "KOSPI200과 S&P 500 지수 선물가격 변동성의 기간별예측 효율성에 관한 실증연구; 시계열예측 모형을 이용하여", 대한경영학회지, 23, pp.315~333 (2000), 대한경영학회
- Akgiray, V., "Conditional Heteroskedasticity in Time Series of Stock Return Eevidence and Forecasts", Journal of Business, 62, pp.55~80 (1989)
- Andersen, T. G., "Answering the Skeptic : Yes, Standard Volatility Model Do Provide Accurate Forecast", International Economic Review, 39, pp.885~905 (1998)
- Black, F., "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities", Journal of Political Economy, 81, pp.637~659 (1973)
- Bollerslev, T., "Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity", Journal of Econometrics, 69, pp.532~547 (1986)
- Cox, J. C., "Option Pricing : A Simplified Approach", Journal of Financial Economics, 7, pp.229~264 (1979)
- Davidson, R., "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses", Econometrica, 49(3), pp.781~793 (1981)
- Day, T., "Stock Market Volatility and the Information Content of Stock Index Option", Journal of Econometrics, 52, pp.267~287 (1992)
- Day, T., "Forecasting Futures Market Volatility", Journal of Derivatives, 1, pp.33~50 (1993)
- Ederington, L. H., "How Asymmetric is U. S. Stock Market Volatility?", Journal of Financial Markets, 13, pp.225~248 (2010)
- Engle, R. F., "Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedsticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation", Econometrica, 50, pp.987~1007 (1982)
- Fleming, J., "The Quality of Market Volatility Forecasts Implied by S&P 100 Index Option Prices", Journal of Empirical Finance, 5, pp.317~345 (1998)
- Fleming, J., "Predicting Stock Market Volatility : A New Measure", Journal of Futures Markets, 15(3), pp.365~402 (1995)
- French, K. R., "Expected Stock Returns and Volatility", Journal of Financial Economics, 19, pp.3~30 (1987)
- Predicting Volatility : Getting the Most out of Return Data Sampled at Different Frequencies, "Ghysels, E.", SSRN, 1~46 (2003)
- Jorion, P., "Predicting Volatility in the Foreign Exchange Market", Journal of Finance, 50, pp.507~528 (1995)
- Nelson, D. B., "Conditional Heteroskedasticity in Asset Returns : A New Approach", Econometrica, 59(2), pp.347~370 (1991)
- Poon, S. H., "Forecasting Volatility in Financial Markets : A Review", Journal of Economic Literature, 41, pp.478~539 (2003)
- Schwert, G. W., "Why does Stock Market Volatility Change over Time?", The Journal of Finance, 44(5), pp.1115~1153 (1989)
- West, K. D., "A Utility-based Comparison of Some Models of Exchange Rate Volatility", Journal of International Economics, 25, pp.23~45 (1993)
