stock index volatility

7/30/2019 Stock Index Volatility

1/38

Modelling and Forecasting StockIndex Volatility

a comparison between GARCH models and theStochastic Volatility model

Supervisor:Professor Moisa Altar


2/38

Table of Contents

Competing volatility models

Data description

Model estimates and forecasting

performances Concluding remarks


3/38

The Stylized Facts

The distribution of financial time series has heaviertails than the normal distribution

Highly correlated values for the squared returns

Changes in the returns tend to cluster

Why model and forecast volatility?

investment

security valuation

risk managementpolicy issues


4/38

Competing Volatility ModelsARCH/GARCH class of models

Engle (1982)

Bollerslev (1986)

Nelson (1991)

Glosten, Jaganathan, and Runkle (1993)

Stochastic Volatility (Variance) model

Taylor (1986)


5/38

The GARCH model

p

1j jtj

q

1i

2

iti0t

ttt

hrh:.eqiancevar

hr:.eqmean

Parameter constraints:

ensuring variance to be positive

stationarity condition:

1j0

,1i0

,0

i

i

0

p

j j

q

i i 111


6/38

Error distribution1. Normal

The density function:

Implied kurtosis:

k=3

The log-likelihood function:

t

t

t

thh

f2

21exp

21

T

t t

t

tNormalh

hL1

2

ln2ln2

1


7/38

2. Student-t

Bollerslev (1987) The density function:

Implied kurtosis:


2,2

svar;

s12

s21f tt21

t

2

t

21

21

tt

4,

4

23

k

T

t t

t

tStudentTL

1

2

2

2

21ln1ln

2

12ln

2

1

2ln

2

1ln


8/38

3. Generalized Error Distribution (GED)

Nelson (1991) The density function:

Implied kurtosis:


3

21

;12

2

1exp

f

2

1

t

t

2351

k

T

t

t

GEDL

1

1ln2ln

1

2

1ln


9/38

The SV model

2vtt1tt

tt

tttt

0,N~v,vhh:.eqvolatility

)h2

1exp(

)1,0(N~,r:.eqmean

Parameter constraints:

stationarity condition:

Linearized form:

1||

ttt

tttttt

vhh

hhry

1

22 27.1)ln()ln(

2

,02

tt

VarE


10/38

Forecast Evaluation Measures Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)

Mean Absolute Error (MAE)

Theil-U Statistics

LINEX loss function

I

i

iiI

RMSE1

222 )(1

I

i

iiI

MAE1

22

1

I

i ii

I

i iiUTheil

1

222

1

1

222

)(

)(

I

i

iiii aa

I

LINEX1

2222 1)())(exp(1


11/38

Data Description

data series: BET-C stock index

time length:April 17, 1998 - April 21, 2003

1255 daily returns

Pt daily closing value of BET-C

Software: Eviews, Ox

Descriptive statistics for BET-C return series

Mean Median Maximum Minimum Std. Dev. Skewness Kurtosis Jarque-Bera Prob.

0.000102 -0.0000519 0.1038602 -0.0975698 0.0153105 0.106634 9.423705 2160.141 0.000

1ttt PlnPlnr

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

250 500 750 1000 1250

BETC

Daily closing prices of BET-C index


12/38

TestedHypotheses

1. Normality

Histogram of the BET-C returns BET-C return quantile plotted

against the Normal quantile

0

100

200

300

400

500

-10 -5 0 5 10

.

.

.

.

. . .

.

.

.

.-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

-.10 -.05 .00 .05 .10 .15

R

NormalQuantile


13/38

2.Homoscedasticity

-.12

-.08

-.04

.00

.04

.08

.12

250 500 750 1000 1250

RETURN

.000

.002

.004

.006

.008

.010

.012

250 500 750 1000 1250

SQUARED_RETURN

BET-C return series

BET-C squared return series


14/38

3. Stationarity

Unit root tests for BET-C return series

ADF Test Statistic -13.53269 1% Critical Value* -3.4384

5% Critical Value -2.8643


*MacKinnon critical values for rejection of hypothesis of a unit root.

PP Test Statistic -28.07887 1% Critical Value* -3.4384



*MacKinnon critical values for rejection of hypothesis of a unit root.


15/38

4. Serial independence

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34

AC

PAC

Autocorrelation coefficients for returns (lags 1 to 36)


16/38

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

1 5 913

17

21

25

29

33

AC

PA

Autocorrelation coefficients for squared returns (lags 1 to 36)


17/38

Model estimates and forecastingperformances

Constant Y(-1) R-squared

Mean equation with in tercept -0.000355 0.276034 0.076278

t-statistic

(probability that the coefficient equals 0)

-0.768264

(0.4425)

9.087175

(0.000)

-

Mean equation without intercept - 0.276769 0.075733

t-statistic

(probability that the coefficient equals 0)

- 9.117758

(0.000)

-

Mean equation specification

GARCH models

Methodology:

- two sets: 1004 observations for model estimation

252 observations for out-of-sample forecast evaluation


18/38

Lagnumber

Correlogram of

residuals

Correlogram of

squared residualsQ-stat Prob Q-stat Prob

1 0.0085 0.927 103.60 0.000

5 3.3598 0.645 162.76 0.000

10 5.7904 0.833 165.21 0.000

15 8.0496 0.922 167.21 0.0000

40

80

120

160

200

-0.05 0.00 0.05

Series: Residuals

Sample 3 1004

Observations 1002

Mean -0.000355Median -0.000463

Maximum 0.093143

Minimum -0.077582

Std. Dev. 0.014613

Skewness -0.022081

Kurtosis 8.209193

Jarque-Bera 1132.997

Probab ilit y 0 .000000

ARCH Test:

F-statistic 114.8229 Probability 0.000000

Obs*R-squared 103.1921 Probability 0.000000

Residual tests

White Heteroskedasticity Test:



ARCH-LM test and White Heteroscedasticity Test

Autocorrelation tests

Normality test

GARCH (1 1) Normal Distribution QML parameter estimates


19/38

GARCH (1,1)Normal DistributionQML parameter estimates

Coefficient Std.Error t-value Probability

AR (1) 0.302055 0.045561 6.630 0.0000

Constant (V) 0.0000472947 0.141153 3.351 0.0008

ARCH(Alpha1) 0.320832 0.065118 4.927 0.0000

GARCH(Beta1) 0.483147 0.102838 4.698 0.0000

GARCH (1,1)Student-T DistributionQML parameter estimates

Coefficient Std.Error t-value Probability

AR(1) 0.280817 0.037364 7.516 0.0000

Constant(V) 0.0000527251 0.144746 3.643 0.0003

ARCH(Alpha1) 0.350230 0.067874 5.160 0.0000

GARCH(Beta1) 0.439533 0.091994 4.778 0.0000

Student(DF) 4.512539 0.656110 6.878 0.0000

Diagnostic test based on the news impact curve (EGARCH vs. GARCH)Test Prob

Sign Bias t-Test 0.41479 0.67830Negative Size Bias t-Test 0.66864 0.50373Positive Size Bias t-Test 0.02906 0.97682Joint Test for the Three Effects 0.47585 0.92416


Sign Bias t-Test 0.38456 0.70056Negative Size Bias t-Test 0.81038 0.41772Positive Size Bias t-Test 0.21808 0.82736Joint Test for the Three Effects 0.73189 0.86568


20/38

SVQML parameter estimates

Coefficient Std. Err or z-Statistic Probability

C(1) -1.269102 0.450023 -2.820081 0.0048

C(2) 0.858869 0.050340 17.06149 0.0000

C(3) -1.486221 0.456019 -3.259119 0.0011

GARCH (1,1)GED DistributionQML parameter estimates

Coefficient Std.Er ror t-value Probabil ity

AR(1) 0.285181 0.057321 4.975 0.0000

Constant(V) 0.0000496321 0.130000 3.818 0.0001

ARCH(Alpha1) 0.333678 0.062854 5.309 0.0000GARCH(Beta1) 0.450807 0.091152 4.946 0.0000

Student(DF) 1.172517 0.081401 14.40 0.0000


Sign Bias t-Test 0.47340 0.63592Negative Size Bias t-Test 0.82446 0.40968

Positive Size Bias t-Test 0.14047 0.88829Joint Test for the Three Effects 0.74931 0.86155

SV modelTo estimate the SV model, the return series was first filtered in order

to eliminate the first order autocorrelation of the returns


21/38

In-sample model evaluationa) Residual tests

Autocorrelation of the residualsLag GARCH(1,1) Nomal GARCH(1,1) Student-T GARCH(1,1) GED SV

Q-stat. p-value Q-stat. p-value Q-stat. p-value Q-stat. p-value

1 1.131 0.287 2.289 0.130 2.014 0.156 0.506 0.477

5 3.286 0.511 4.755 0.313 4.408 0354 2.802 0.591

10 5.654 0.774 7.046 0.632 6.720 0.667 6.237 0.716

15 8.679 0.851 10.144 0.752 9.796 0.777 7.571 0.910

Lag GARCH(1,1) Nomal GARCH(1,1) Student-T GARCH(1,1) GED SV

Q-stat. p-value Q-stat. p-value Q-stat. p-value Q-stat. p-value

1 0.127 1 0.204 1 0.186 1 0.589 0.443

5 3.198 0.362 3.606 0.307 3.499 0.321 2.681 0.613

10 6.033 0.644 6.235 0.621 6.180 0.627 6.539 0.685

15 6.782 0.913 6.936 0.905 6.895 0.907 8.824 0.842

Autocorrelation of the squared residuals

Kurtosis explanationUnexplained

kurtosis

GARCH (1,1) Normal 4.28

GARCH (1,1) Student-t -7.21

GARCH (1,1) GED 2.56

SV -2.05


22/38

b) In-sample forecast evaluation

RMSE MAE THEIL-U1

GARCH 11 Normal 0.0000196062 0.000257336 0.646352

GARCH 11 T 0.0000195026 0.000256516 0.639539

GARCH 11 GED 0.0000194814 0.000253146 0.638149

SV 0.0000186253 0.000231101 0.583293

LINEX a=-20 a=-10 a= 10 a= 20

GARCH 11 Normal 7,70895E-09 1,92751E-09 1,92806E-09 7,71335E-09

GARCH 11 T 7,62777E-09 1,9072E-09 1,90773E-09 7,63198E-09

GARCH 11 GED 7,61114E-09 1,90305E-09 1,90359E-09 7,61545E-09

SV 6,95655E-09 1,73942E-09 1,73999E-09 6,96113E-09

1 Benchmark model - Random Walk


23/38

Out-of-sample Forecast Evaluation Forecast methodology

- rolling sample window: 1004 observations- at each step, the n-step ahead forecast is stored- n=1, 5, 10

Benchmark: realized volatility = squared returns

.000

.002

.004

.006

.008

.010

.012

1050 1100 1150 1200 1250

RR

Forecast output


24/38

Forecast output

0

0,0005

0,001

0,0015

0,002

0,0025

0,003

0,0035

0,004

0,0045

0,005

1

1

9

3

7

5

5

7

3

9

1

10

9

12

7

14

5

16

3

18

1

19

9

21

7

23

5

25

3

1day

5days

10 days

0

0,001

0,002

0,003

0,004

0,005

0,006

119

37

55

73

91

1

09

1

27

1

45

1

63

1

81

1

99

2

17

2

35

2

53

1day

5days

10 days

0

0,0005

0,001

0,0015

0,002

0,0025

0,003

0,0035

0,004

0,0045

0,005

1 20 39 58 77 96115

134

153

172

191

210

229

248

1day

5days

10 days

0

0,0001

0,0002

0,0003

0,0004

0,0005

0,0006

0,0007

0,0008

119

37

55

73

91

1

09

1

27

1

45

1

63

1

81

1

99

2

17

2

35

2

53

1 day

5 days

10 days

a) GARCH (1,1) Normal c) GARCH (1,1) GED

b) GARCH (1,1) Student-t d) SV


25/38

Evaluation Measures

1-step ahead forecast evaluationRMSE MAE THEIL-U1

GARCH 11 Normal 0,000035300 0,00022591 0,583721

GARCH 11 T 0,000035111 0,000204242 0,580597

GARCH 11 GED 0,000035760 0,000203486 0,591337

SV 0,000048823 0,000253071 0,807336

LINEX a=-20 a=-10 a= 10 a= 20


GARCH 11 T 6,23593E-09 1,55923E-09 1,55971E-09 6,2398E-09

GARCH 11 GED 6,46868E-09 1,61743E-09 1,61795E-09 6,47286E-09

SV 1,2055E-08 3,01454E-09 3,01612E-09 1,20676E-08



26/38

5-step ahead forecast evaluation

RMSE MAE THEIL-U1

GARCH 11 Normal 0.0000512767 0.0003042315 0.847915

GARCH 11 T 0.0000512001 0.0003077174 0.846648GARCH 11 GED 0.0000511668 0.0002983467 0.846097

SV 0.0000511653 0.0002851430 0.846073


LINEX a=-20 a=-10 a= 10 a= 20

GARCH 11 Normal 1.3297E-08 3.325E-09 3.3268E-09 1.33108E-08

GARCH 11 T 1.3257E-08 3.315E-09 3.3169E-09 1.32711E-08

GARCH 11 GED 1.3241E-08 3.311E-09 3.3126E-09 1.32539E-08

SV 1.3239E-08 3.310E-09 3.3125E-09 1.32534E-08


27/38

10-step ahead forecast evaluation

RMSE MAE THEIL-U1

GARCH 11 Normal 0.0000513675 0.0003060239 0.849416

GARCH 11 T 0.0000513716 0.0003107481 0.849484

GARCH 11 GED 0.0000513779 0.000300542 0.849588

SV 0.0000514735 0.0002870131 0.851169

LINEX a=-20 a=-10 a= 10 a= 20


GARCH 11 T 1,33467E-08 3,33753E-09 3,33925E-09 1,33604E-08

GARCH 11 GED 1,33499E-08 3,33834E-09 3,34007E-09 1,33637E-08

SV 1,33996E-08 3,35077E-09 3,35251E-09 1,34135E-08



28/38

Comparison between the statistical featuresof the two sample periods

In-sample Out-of-sample

Number of observations 1004 252

Mean -0.000468 0.002371

Median -0.000378 0.001137Maximum 0.093332 0.103860

Minimum -0.097570 -0.065731

Standard Deviati on 0.015209 0.015531

Skewness -0.116772 0.925148

Kurtosis 8.666434 11.94869

Jarque-Bera 1344.146 880.2563

Probability 0 0


29/38

Concluding remarks

In-sample analysis:

a) residual tests: all models may be appropriate;

b) evaluation measures: SV model is the best performer;

Out-of-sample analysis:

- for a 1-day forecast horizon GARCH models outperform SV;

- for the 5-day and 10-day forecast horizon, model

performances seem to converge;- the best model changes with forecast horizon and with

forecast evaluation measure;

- there is no clear winner;


30/38

Concluding remarks

Sample construction problems;

Further research:

- allowing for switching regimes;

- allowing for leptokurtotic distributions in the SV

- a better proxy for realized volatility;

Bibli h


31/38

Bibliography

Alexander, Carol (2001)Market Models - A Guide to Financial Data Analysis, John Wiley &Sons, Ltd.; Andersen, T. G. and T. Bollerslev (1997) -Answering the Skeptics: Yes, Standard Volatility Models Do Provide

Accurate Forecasts, International Economic Review; Armstrong, J.S. (1995) - On the Selection of Error Measures for Comparisons Among Forecasting Methods,

Journal of Forecasting; Armstrong, J.S (1978)Forecasting with Econometric Methods: Folklore versus Fact, Journal of Business, 51

(4), 1978, 549-564; Bluhm, H.H.W. and J. Yu (2000) - Forecasting volatility: Evidence from the German stock market, Working

paper, University of Auckland; Bollerslev, Tim, Robert F. Engle and Daniel B. Nelson (1994)ARCH Models, Handbook of Econometrics,

Volume 4, Chapter 49, North Holland; Bystrm, H. (2001) - Managing Extreme Risks in Tranquil and Volatile Markets Using Conditional Extreme Value

Theory, Department of Economics, Lund University; Christodoulakis, G.A. and Stephen E. Satchell (2002)Forecasting Using Log Volatility Models, Cass Business

School, Research Paper; Christoffersen, P. F and F. X. Diebold. (1997) - How Relevant is Volatility Forecasting for Financial Risk

Management?, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania; Engle, R.F. (1982)Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity with estimates of the variance of UK

inflation, Econometrica, 50, pp. 987-1008; Engle, R.F. and Victor K. Ng (1993)Measuring and Testing the Impact of News on Volatility, The Journal of

Fiance, Vol. XLVIII, No. 5; Engle, R. (2001)Garch 101:The Use of ARCH/GARCH Models in Applied Econometrics, Journal of Economic

Perspectives Volume 15, Number 4 Fall 2001 Pages 157-168; Engle, R. and A. J. Patton (2001)What good is a volatility model?, Research Paper, Quantitative Finance,

Volume 1, 237-245; Engle, R. (2001)New Frontiers for ARCH Models, prepared for Conference on Volatility Modelling and

Forecasting, Perth, Australia, September 2001; Glosten, L. R., R. Jaganathan, and D. Runkle (1993)On the Relation between the Expected Value and the

Volatility of the Normal Excess Return on Stocks, Journal of Finance, 48, 1779-1801; Hamilton, J.D. (1994)Time Series Analysis, Princeton University Press; Hamilton J.D. (1994)StateSpace Models, Handbook of Econometrics, Volume 4, Chapter 50, North

Holland;


32/38

Hol, E. and S. J. Koopman (2000) - Forecasting the Variability of Stock Index Returns with Stochastic VolatilityModels and Implied Volatility, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper;

Koopman, S.J. and Eugenie Hol Uspenski (2001)The Stochastic volatility in Mean model: Empirical evidencefrom international stock markets,

Liesenfeld, R. and R.C. Jung (2000) Stochastic Volatility Models: Conditional Normality versus Heavy-Tailed

Distributions, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 15, 137-160; Lopez, J.A.(1999) Evaluating the Predictive Accuracy of Volatility Models, Economic Research Deparment,

Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco; Nelson, Daniel B. (1991)Conditional Heteroskedasticity in Asset Returns: A New Approach, Econometrica,

59, 347-370; Ozaki, T. and P.J. Thomson (1998)Transformation and Seasonal Adjustment, Technical Report, Institute of

Statistics and Operations Research, New Zealand Peters, J. (2001) - Estimating and Forecasting Volatility of Stock Indices Using Asymmetric GARCH Models and

(Skewed) Student-T Densities, Ecole dAdministration des Affaires, University of Liege; Peters, J. and S. Laurent (2002)A Tutorial for G@RCH 2.3, a Complete Ox Package for Estimating and

Forecasting ARCH Models; Pindyck, R.S and D.L. Rubinfeld (1998)Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts, Irwin/McGraw-Hill; Poon, S.H. and C. Granger (2001) - Forecasting Financial Market Volatility - A Review, University of Lancaster,

Working paper; Ruiz, E. (1994) - Quasi-Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Stochastic Volatility Models, Journal of

Econometrics, 63, 289-306; Ruiz, Esther, Angeles Carnero and Daniel Pena (2001)Is Stochastic Volatility More Flexible than Garch?,

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Statistics and Econometrics Series, Working Paper 01-08; Sandmann, G. and S.J. Koopman (1997)Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Stochastic Volatility Models,

Financial Markets Group, London School of Economics, Discussion Paper 248; Shephard, H. (1993)Fitting Nonlinear Time-series Models with Applications to stochastic Variance models,

Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 8, S135-S152; Shephard, Neil, S. Kim and S. Chib (1998)Stochastic Volatility: Likelihood Inference and Comparison with

ARCH Models, Review of Economic Studies 65, 361-393; Taylor, S.J. (1986) - Modelling Financial Time Series, John Wiley; Terasvirta, T. (1996) - Two Stylized Facts and the GARCH(1,1) Model, W.P. Series in Finance and Economics

96, Stockholm School of Economics; Walsh, D. and G. Tsou (1998) - Forecasting Index Volatility: Sampling Interval and Non-Trading Effects,

Applied Financial Economics, 8, 477-485


33/38

Appendix GARCH mean equation

Dependent Variable: Y

Method: Least Squares

Date: 06/23/03 Time: 00:45

Sample(adjusted): 3 1004

Included observations: 1002 after adjusting endpoints

Variable Coefficient Std. Error t-Statistic Prob.

C -0.000355 0.000462 -0.768264 0.4425

Y(-1) 0.276034 0.030376 9.087175 0.0000

R-squared 0.076278 Mean dependent var -0.000487Adjusted R-squared 0.075354 S.D. dependent var 0.015204

S.E. of regression 0.014620 Akaike info criterion -5.610880

Sum squared resid 0.213740 Schwarz criterion -5.601080

Log likelihood 2813.051 F-statistic 82.57675

Durbin-Watson stat 2.002722 Prob(F-statistic) 0.000000

1. The AR(1) model with intercept


34/38

2.The AR(1) model without interceptDependent Variable: Y


Date: 06/23/03 Time: 00:46




Y(-1) 0.276769 0.030355 9.117758 0.0000

R-squared 0.075733 Mean dependent var -0.000487

Adjusted R-squared 0.075733 S.D. dependent var 0.015204



Log likelihood 2812.755 Durbin-Watson stat 2.003016

Appendix Residual Tests


35/38

Appendix Residual TestsDate: 06/23/03 Time: 00:48

Sample: 3 1004

Included observations: 1002

Autocorrelation Partial Correlation AC PAC Q-Stat Prob.| | .| | 1 -0.003 -0.003 0.0085 0.927

.| | .| | 2 -0.011 -0.011 0.1228 0.940

.| | .| | 3 0.041 0.041 1.8102 0.613

.| | .| | 4 0.004 0.004 1.8256 0.768

.| | .| | 5 0.039 0.040 3.3598 0.645

.| | .| | 6 0.030 0.028 4.2395 0.644

.| | .| | 7 0.013 0.014 4.4124 0.731

.| | .| | 8 0.027 0.025 5.1482 0.742

.| | .| | 9 -0.025 -0.027 5.7834 0.761

.| | .| | 10 -0.003 -0.005 5.7904 0.833

.| | .| | 11 0.034 0.029 6.9812 0.801

.| | .| | 12 0.008 0.008 7.0442 0.855

.| | .| | 13 0.030 0.029 7.9561 0.846

.| | .| | 14 -0.007 -0.009 8.0088 0.889

.| | .| | 15 0.006 0.007 8.0496 0.922

.| | .| | 16 -0.049 -0.055 10.543 0.837

.| | .| | 17 0.021 0.020 10.994 0.857

.| | .| | 18 -0.002 -0.008 10.998 0.894

.| | .| | 19 0.007 0.009 11.051 0.922

.| | .| | 20 0.023 0.023 11.599 0.929

Correlogram of Residuals


36/38

Date: 06/23/03 Time: 00:49

Sample: 3 1004


Autocorrelation Partial Correlation AC PAC Q-Stat Prob

.|** | .|** | 1 0.321 0.321 103.60 0.000

.|* | .|* | 2 0.194 0.101 141.44 0.000

.|* | .| | 3 0.125 0.041 157.05 0.000

.|* | .| | 4 0.075 0.010 162.73 0.000

.| | .| | 5 0.005 -0.043 162.76 0.000

.| | .| | 6 0.008 0.005 162.82 0.000

.| | .| | 7 0.042 0.045 164.59 0.000

.| | .| | 8 0.024 0.003 165.18 0.000

.| | .| | 9 0.005 -0.012 165.21 0.000

.| | .| | 10 -0.027 -0.040 165.97 0.000

.| | .| | 11 -0.004 0.012 165.98 0.000

.| | .| | 12 -0.009 0.000 166.06 0.000

.| | .| | 13 -0.028 -0.022 166.84 0.000

.| | .| | 14 -0.011 0.005 166.96 0.000

.| | .| | 15 -0.016 -0.012 167.21 0.000

.| | .| | 16 0.007 0.020 167.26 0.000

.| | .| | 17 -0.019 -0.020 167.61 0.000

.| | .| | 18 -0.004 0.005 167.62 0.000

.| | .| | 19 0.000 0.003 167.62 0.000

.| | .| | 20 -0.017 -0.019 167.91 0.000

Correlogram of Squared Residuals


37/38

ARCH Test:



Test Equation:

Dependent Variable: RESID^2


Date: 06/23/03 Time: 00:52




C 0.000145 1.83E-05 7.903650 0.0000

RESID^2(-1) 0.321081 0.029964 10.71555 0.0000

R-squared 0.103089 Mean dependent var 0.000213


S.E. of regression 0.000543 Akaike info criterion -12.19544Sum squared resid 0.000295 Schwarz criterion -12.18564



ARCH-LM test


38/38

White Heteroskedasticity Test:



Test Equation:

Dependent Variable: RESID^2


Date: 06/23/03 Time: 00:53

Sample: 3 1004



C 0.000144 1.82E-05 7.933013 0.0000

Y(-1) -0.000222 0.001125 -0.197479 0.8435

Y(-1)^2 0.299471 0.026700 11.21598 0.0000

R-squared 0.112508 Mean dependent var 0.000213






White Heteroskedasticity Test

stock index volatility

Documents