02.12.2012 Views

Applications of state space models in finance

Applications of state space models in finance

Applications of state space models in finance

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

62 5 Conditional heteroskedasticity <strong>models</strong><br />

have been proposed to capture asymmetric effects. Below, only the two most <strong>in</strong>fluential<br />

nonl<strong>in</strong>ear extensions are discussed. For a more comprehensive overview <strong>of</strong> the<br />

broad spectrum <strong>of</strong> nonl<strong>in</strong>ear GARCH specifications, see, for example, Hentschel (1995)<br />

or Franses and van Dijk (2000, ¢ 4.1.2).<br />

5.1.2.1 Exponential GARCH<br />

The first GARCH extension, <strong>in</strong> which the conditional volatility depends on both the<br />

size as well as the sign <strong>of</strong> lagged shocks, was proposed Nelson (1991). In its simplest<br />

specification with p = q = 1, the exponential GARCH (EGARCH) model can be written<br />

as<br />

log(ht) = ω + γ1zt−1 + ϑ1(|zt−1| − E(|zt−1|)) + δ1 log(ht−1). (5.13)<br />

Due to the model<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> ht <strong>in</strong> logarithms, no restrictions on the coefficients have to be<br />

imposed to ensure nonnegativity <strong>of</strong> the conditional volatility. Let the function g(zt) be<br />

def<strong>in</strong>ed as g(zt) := γzt + ϑ1(|zt| − E(|zt|)) where the two summands relate to the sign<br />

and to the magnitude effect. By rewrit<strong>in</strong>g it as<br />

g(zt) = (γ1 + ϑ1)ztI(zt > 0) + (γ1 − ϑ1)ztI(zt < 0) − ϑ1(E|z1|), (5.14)<br />

with I(·) be<strong>in</strong>g an <strong>in</strong>dicator function, it can be seen how asymmetric effects are <strong>in</strong>corporated:<br />

while the term (γ1 + ϑ1) is affected by positive shocks, negative shocks have an<br />

impact on (γ1 − ϑ1). Generally, positive shocks have a smaller effect on ht than negative<br />

shocks <strong>of</strong> equally sized positive shocks (cf. Engle and Ng 1993). This becomes clear by<br />

hav<strong>in</strong>g a look at the news impact curve (NIC) 13 for the EGARCH model, which is given<br />

by<br />

NIC � ɛt|ht = σ 2� ⎧ � �<br />

(γ1 ⎪⎨<br />

+ ϑ1)<br />

A exp ɛt , for ɛt > 0,<br />

σ<br />

= � �<br />

(5.15)<br />

(γ1 ⎪⎩<br />

− ϑ1)<br />

A exp ɛt , for ɛt < 0,<br />

σ<br />

with A = σ2δ1 �<br />

exp(ω − ϑ1 2/π), for parameter constellation γ1 < 0, 0 ≤ ϑ < 1 and<br />

ϑ1 + δ1 < 1. As the EGARCH model is not differentiable with respect to zt−1 at zero,<br />

its estimation is more difficult than that <strong>of</strong> alternative asymmetric <strong>models</strong>. Another<br />

problem is related to forecast<strong>in</strong>g. Usually, the researcher is <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> forecast<strong>in</strong>g ht+l<br />

and not log ht+l. This requires a transformation that depends on the complete l-step<br />

ahead forecast distribution, f(yt+l|Ωt), which is generally not available <strong>in</strong> closed-form.<br />

5.1.2.2 GJR-GARCH<br />

Glosten et al. (1993) and Zakoian (1994) <strong>in</strong>dependently <strong>in</strong>troduced an alternative nonl<strong>in</strong>ear<br />

extension to capture asymmetric effects: the GJR-GARCH or threshold GARCH<br />

model. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to L<strong>in</strong>g and McAleer (2002), the GJR-GARCH model represents the<br />

13 Engle and Ng (1993) <strong>in</strong>troduced the NIC, def<strong>in</strong>ed as the functional relationship between<br />

the conditional variance and lagged shocks, as a measure <strong>of</strong> how the arrival <strong>of</strong> new <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

is reflected <strong>in</strong> volatility estimates. The NIC can be used to compare different GARCH <strong>models</strong>.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!