Dynamic Semiparametric Models for Expected Shortfall (and Value-at-Risk)
|
|
- Mervin Dorsey
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Supplemental Appendix to: Dynamic Semiparametric Models for Expected Shortfall (and Value-at-Ris) Andrew J. Patton Johanna F. Ziegel Rui Chen Due University University of Bern Due University September 08 This appendix contains three parts. Part presents lemmas that provide further details on the proof of Theorem presented in the main paper. Part presents a detailed veri cation that the high level assumptions made in the theorems of the paper hold for the widely-used GARCH(,) process. Part 3 contains additional tables of analysis. Appendix SA.: Detailed proofs Throughout this appendix, we press the subscript on ^ T for simplicity of presentation, and we denote the conditional distribution and density functions as F t and f t rather than F t (jf t ) and f t (jf t ) : In Lemmas and 3 below, we will refer to the expected score, de ned as: () = E [g t ()] Ft (v t ()) = E e t () Ft (v t ()) e t () v t () rv t () 0 + E t [Y t j fy t v t ()g] v t () + e t () re t () 0 () Lemma Let Then under Assumptions -, ( ) [g = p T (^ 0 ) = ( 0 ) + o p () p T T X t= g t ( 0 ) + o p ()! () (3)
2 Proof of Lemma. Consider a mean-value expansion of (^) around 0 : (^) =( 0 ) [g (^ 0 ) (4) = = ( )(^ 0 ) (5) where lies between ^ and 0, and noting that ( 0 ) = 0 and the de nition of ( ) given in the statement of the lemma. Proving the claim involves two results: (I) ( ) = ( 0 )+o p (); and (II) p T (^) = p T P T t= g t( 0 ) + o p (): Part (I) is easy to verify: Since v t () and e t () are twice continuously di erentiable, and e t ( 0 ) < 0, () is continuous in and () is non-singular in a neighborhood of 0. Then by the continuous mapping theorem, p! 0 ) ( ) p! ( 0 ). Establishing (II) builds on Theorem 3 of Huber (967) and Lemma A. of Weiss (99), which extends Huber s conclusion to the case of non-iid dependent random variables. We are going to verify the conditions of Weiss s Lemma A.. Since the other conditions are easily checed, we only need to show that T = P T t= g t(^) = o p (), which we show in Lemma, and that his assumptions N3 and N4 hold, which we show in Lemmas 3-6. Lemma Under Assumptions -, T = P T t= g t(^) = o p (): Proof of Lemma. Let fe j g p j= be the standard basis of Rp and de ne T L j = T (a) = T X t= L F Z0 Y t ; v t (^ + ae j ); e t (^ + ae j ); where a is a scalar. Let G j T (a) (a scalar) be the right partial derivative of Lj T (a), that is (6) T G j = T (a) = T X t= r j e t (^ + ae j ) e t (^ + ae j ) r j v t (^ + ae j ) e t (^ + ae j ) ( n o Y t v t (^ + ae j ) )+ (7) n o! Y t v t (^ + ae j ) (v t (^ + ae j ) Y t ) v t (^ + ae j ) + e t (^ + ae j ) G j T (0) = lim!0+ Gj T ( ) is the right partial derivative of L T () at ^ in the direction j, while lim!0+ Gj T ( ) is the left partial derivative of L T () at ^ in the direction j. Because L T () achieves its minimum at ^; and its left and right partial derivatives exist, its left derivative must
3 be non-positive and its right derivative must be non-negative. Thus, jg j T (0)j lim!0+ Gj T ( ) = T = T X t= lim!0+ Gj T ( ) r j v t (^) n e t (^) o Y t = v t (^) X T = T = jr j v t (^)j n o e t (^) Y t = v t (^) t= + r je t (^) n v t (^) Y t Y t = v t (^)o! (8) e t (^) The second term in the penultimate line vanishes as fy t = v t (^)g(v t (^) Y t ) is always zero. By Assumption (C), for all t, jr j v t (^)j rv t (^) V (F t ) and =e t (^) H, thus: jg j T (0)j H " T = max V X T n (F t ) Y t = v t (^)o # (9) tt t= H is nite by Assumption (C). Next note that for all > 0; Pr T = max V (F t tt ) > TX t= h Pr V (F t ) > T =i with the latter inequality following from Marov s inequality. Since E[V (F t TX t= E[V (F t ) 3 ] 3 T 3=! 0 (0) ) 3 ] is nite by assumption (D), we then have that T = max V (F t ) = o p () : Finally, by Assumption (G) we tt have P o T t= ny t = v t (^) = O a:s: (). We therefore have G j T (0)! p 0. Since this holds for every j, we have T = P T t= g t(^) = o p (). The following three lemmas show each of the three parts of Assumption N3 of Weiss (99) holds. In the proofs below we mae repeated use of mean-value expansions, and we use to denote a point on the line connecting ^ and 0 ; and to denote a point on the line connecting and 0 : The particular point on the line can vary from expansion to expansion. Lemma 3 Under assumptions -, Assumption N3(i) of Weiss (99) holds: T () a 0 ; for 0 d 0. for T su ciently large, where a and d 0 are strictly positive numbers. 3
4 Proof of Lemma 3. A mean-value expansion yields: T (^) = T ( 0 ) + ( )(^ 0 ) = T ( )(^ 0 ) () since T ( 0 ) = 0; where () t ()]=@: Using the fact that ( Z t fy t v t ()gjf t ] vt() yf t (y)dy = v t ()f t (v t ())rv t we can write: r v t () () = E e t () + rv t() 0 re t () e t () + re t() 0 rv t () e t () + r e t () e t () + e t () 3 re t() 0 re t () Ft (v t ()) v t () + f t(v t ()) e t () r0 v t ()rv t () + e t () r0 e t ()re t ()]g F t E [Y tfy t v t ()gjf t Ft (v t ()) ] + e t () (3) Evaluated at 0, the rst two terms of drop out because F t v t ( 0 )gjf t ] = e t 0 : De ne D as D ( 0 ) = T T X t= v t ( 0 ) = and E[Y tfy t ft (v t ( 0 )) E e t ( 0 ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( 0 ) + e t ( 0 ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( 0 ) Below we show that ( ) = D + O(^ 0 ) by decomposing T ( ) D into four terms and showing that each is bounded by a O(^ 0 ) term. First term: Using a mean-value expansion around 0 and Assumptions (C)-(D) we obtain: r E v t ( ) e t ( ) + rv t( ) 0 re t ( ) e t ( ) + re t( ) 0 rv t ( ) Ft (v t ( )) e t ( ) E HV (F t ) + H V (F t )H (F t ) f t (v t ( )) rv t ( )( 0 ) (5) K n HE[V (F t ) 3 ] =3 E[V (F t ) 3= ] =3 + H E[V (F t ) 3 ] =3 E[H (F t ) 3 ] =3o 0 (4) 4
5 Second term: Again using a mean-value expansion around 0 and Assumptions (C)-(D): E e t ( ) r e t ( ) e t ( ) 3 re t( ) 0 re t ( ) Ft (v t ( )) v t ( ) E[Y tfy t v t ( )gjf t ] + e t ( ) E[ H (F t )H + H (F t ) H 3 H (F t ) (6) ((F t (v t ( )) = )rv t ( ) + re t ( )) ( 0 )] f(= + )(H E[V (F t )H (F t )] + H 3 E[V (F t )H (F t ) ]) + (H E[H (F t )H (F t )] + H 3 E[H (F t ) 3 ])g 0 Third term: E ft (v t ( )) e t ( ) rv t( ) 0 rv t ( ) = TX T t= Ef f t(v t ( )) e t ( ) rv t( ) 0 rv t ( ) + f t(v t ( )) e t ( ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) + f t(v t ( 0 )) e t ( ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) f t (v t ( 0 )) e t ( 0 ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( 0 ) f t (v t ( 0 )) e t ( ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) f t (v t ( 0 )) e t ( 0 ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) + f t(v t ( 0 )) e t ( 0 ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( f t (v t ( 0 )) ) e t ( 0 ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( 0 )g = TX T Ef f t(v t ( )) e t ( ) [r v t ( )( 0 )]rv t ( ) t= + f t(v t ( )) f t (v t ( 0 )) e t ( rv t ( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) ) + f t(v t ( 0 )) e t ( ) ( 0 )rv t ( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) + f t(v t ( 0 )) e t ( 0 ) rv t( 0 ) 0 ( 0 ) v t ( )g T T X t= EfV (F t ) (KH V (F t )) + KH V (F t ) 3 + KH H (F t )V (F t ) + KHV (F t )V (F t )g 0 f t (v t ( )) e t ( ) rv t( 0 ) 0 rv t ( ) (7) 5
6 Fourth term: The bound on this term follows similar steps to that of the third term: TX T Ef e t= t ( ) re t( ) 0 re t ( ) e t ( 0 ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( 0 )g TX = T Ef e t ( ) re t( ) 0 re t ( ) e t ( ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( ) (8) t= + e t ( ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( ) + e t ( 0 ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( ) e t ( 0 ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( ) e t ( 0 ) re t( 0 ) 0 re t ( 0 )g j X T T fh E[H (F t )H (F t )] + H 3 E H (F t ) 3 + H E[H (F t )H (F t )]g 0 t= Therefore, T ( ) = D T + O(^ 0 ) ) T ( ) D T K^ 0 ;where K is some constant <, for T su ciently large. By Assumption (E), D T has eigenvalues bounded below by a positive constant, denoted as a; for T su ciently large. Thus, T (^) = T ( ) ^ 0 = D T (^ 0 ) (D T T ( ))(^ 0 ) (9) D T (^ 0 ) (D T T ( ))(^ 0 ) (a K^ 0 ) ^ 0 The penultimate inequality holds by the triangle inequality, and the nal inequality follows from Assumption (E) on the minimum eigenvalue of D T : Thus, for T a K^ 0 > 0; the result follows. su ciently large so that Lemma 4 De ne t (; d) = g t ( ) g t () (0) d Then under assumptions -, Assumption N3(ii) of Weiss (99) holds E[ t (; d)] bd; for 0 + d d 0 ; d 0 () for T su ciently large, where b; d;and d 0 are strictly positive numbers. Proof of Lemma 4. In this proof, the strictly positive constant c and the mean-value expansion term,, can change from line to line. Pic d 0 such that for any that satis es 6
7 0 d 0, all the conditions in Assumption (C) and (D) hold as well as e t () v t () 0. Let us expand g t () into six terms: g t () = r 0 v t () e t () fy t v t ()g r 0 v t () e t () + v t ()r 0 e t () e t () fy t v t ()g () v t ()r 0 e t () r 0 e t () e t () e t () fy t v t ()gy t + r0 e t () e t () We will bound t (; d) by considering six terms, t (; d) (i) ; i = ; ; ; 6, de ned below. Each term is shown to be bounded by a constant times d. First term: t (; d) () = d r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) fy t v t ( )g r 0 v t () e t () fy t v t ()g (3) Set = arg min d v t ( ) and = arg max d v t ( ). Since v t () and e t () are assumed to be twice continously di erentiable, and exist. We want to tae the indicator function out from the operator. To this end, let us discuss what t (; d) () equals in two cases. Case : Y t v t (). (a) If Y t > v t ( ), t (; d) () = r0 v t() e t(). (b) If Y t < v t ( ), t (; d) () = r0 v t( ) r 0 v t() e t( ) e t(). (c) If v t ( ) Y t v t ( ), d t (; d) () = max ( d d;y tv( ) r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 v t ( ) r 0 v t () e t ( ) e t () ; r 0 ) v t () e t () r 0 v t () e t () + r 0 v t () e t () Case : Y t > v t (), t (; d) () = fy t v( )g r 0 v t ( ) d;y tv( ) e t ( ) (5) fy t v( )g r 0 v t ( ) d e t ( ) 0 + d d 0 implies that both and (which are in a d-neighborhood of ) are in a d 0 -neighborhood of 0, and so r 0 v t () e t () d r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) 0 d 0 (4) r 0 v t () e t () (6) 7
8 Thus, t (; d) () (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g) (7) r 0 v t () e t () + r 0 v t ( ) r 0 v t () e t ( ) e t () ; 0 d 0 d where E t [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g] = Z vt() v t( ) f t (y)dy (8) Kjv t ( ) v t ()j KV (F t ) KV (F t )d and similarly, E [fv t () < Y t v t ( )gjf t ] KV (F t )d (9) and E [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()gjf t ] KV (F t )d Further and by the mean-value theorem, ) r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) d r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) 0 d r 0 v t () e t () = r 0 v t () e t () r 0 v t () e t () HV (F t ) (30) r v t ( ) e t ( ) + r0 v t ( )re t ( ) e t ( ) ( ) (3) HV (F t ) + H V (F t )H (F t ) d: (3) By Assumption (D), E[V (F t )] and E[V (F t )H (F t )] are nite, so E[ t (; d) () ] cd, where c is a strictly positive constant. Second term: t (; d) () = e t( ) d the rst term that E[ t (; d) () ] cd, where c is a strictly positive constant. r0 v t( ) r 0 v t() e t() : It was shown in the derivations for Third term: t (; d) (3) = d v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) fy t v t ( )g v t ()r 0 e t () e t () fy t v t ()g (33) 8
9 Similar to the rst term, t (; d) (3) can be bounded by where (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g) (34) v t ()r 0 e t () e t () + v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) v t ()r 0 e t () e t ( ) e t () 0 d 0 d E [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )gjf t ] 3KV (F t )d and 0 d where e t () v t () 0 is used, and by the mean-value theorem, (35) v t ()r 0 e t () e t () H H (F t ) (36) v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) v t ()r 0 e t () e t ( ) e t () (37) = r 0 e t ( )rv t ( ) v t ( )r 0 e t ( )re t ( ) e t ( ) e t ( ) 3 + v t( )r e t ( ) e t ( ) ( ) ) d v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) v t ()r 0 e t () e t () (38) H V (F t )H (F t ) + H H (F t ) + H H (F t ) d By Assumption (D), E[V (F t )H (F t )], E[H (F t ) ], E[H (F t )] <. Therefore, E[ t (; d) (3) ] cd, where c is a strictly positive constant. Fourth term: t (; d) (4) = e t( ) d term we showed that E[ t (; d) (4) ] cd, where c is a strictly positive constant. vt( )r0 e t( ) v t()r 0 e t() e t() : In the derivations for the third Fifth term: t (; d) (5) = d r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) fy t v t ( )gy t r 0 e t () e t () fy t v t ()gy t (39) Similar to the rst term, t (; d) (5) can be bounded by (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g) (40) jy t j r 0 e t () e t () + jy tj r 0 e t ( ) r 0 e t () e t ( ) e t () 0 d 0 d 9
10 where E [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()gjy t j jf t ] = Z vt() v t( ) jyjf t (y)dy Kjv t ( )j jv t ( ) v t ()j (4) KV (F t )V (F t ) KV (F t )V (F t )d and similarly, E [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()gjy t j jf t ] KV (F t )V (F t )d (4) and E [fv t () < Y t v t ( )gjy t j jf t ] KV (F t )V (F t )d Further and by the mean-value theorem, r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) ) d 0 d r 0 e t () e t () = r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 e t () e t () H H (F t ) (43) r 0 e t ( )re t ( ) e t ( ) 3 + r e t ( ) e t ( ) ( ) (44) H3 H (F t ) + H H (F t ) d r 0 e t () e t () By Assumption (D), E[V (F t )V (F t )H (F t )], E[H (F t ) jy t j], E[H (F t )jy t j] <. Therefore, E[ t (; d) (5) ] cd, where c is a strictly positive constant. Sixth term: By the mean-value theorem, r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) ) d (6) t (; d) = r 0 e t () e t () = r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) d r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 e t () e t () (45) r 0 e t ( )re t ( ) e t ( ) + r e t ( ) e t ( ) ( ) (46) H H (F t ) + H H (F t ) d: (47) r 0 e t () e t () By Assumption (D), E[H (F t ) ], E[H (F t )] <. Therefore, E[ t (; d) (6) ] cd, where c is a strictly positive constant. Thus we have shown that t (; d) P 6 i= t(; d) (i) with E[ t (; d) (i) ] cd, 8i = ; ; ; 6, where c is a strictly positive constant, proving the lemma. 0
11 Lemma 5 Under Assumptions -, Assumption N3(iii) of Weiss (99) holds: E[ t (; d) q ] cd; for 0 + d d 0 ; and some q > for T su ciently large, and where c > 0; d 0 and d 0 > 0: Proof of Lemma 5. expansion term,, can change from line to line. In this proof, the strictly positive constant c and the mean-value Pic d 0 such that for any that satis es 0 d 0, all the conditions in Assumption (C) and (D) hold as well as e t () v t () 0. Similar to Lemma 4, we will decompose t (; d) into six terms, t (; d) (i) ; for i = ; ; :::; 6. By Jensen s inequality, E [ t (; d) q ] 6 q P 6 i= E[ t(; d) (i) q ]; q >. We will show that for some 0 < <, E[ t (; d) (i) + ] cd, 8 i = ; ; ; 6, where c is a strictly positive constant. First term: t (; d) () = d r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) fy t v t ( )g r 0 v t () e t () fy t v t ()g (48) Set = arg min d v t ( ) and = arg max d v t ( ). Following the same argument as in the proof of Lemma 4, we obtain [ t (; d) () ] + (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( (49) )g) r 0 + v t () e t ()! + r 0 v t ( ) r 0! + v t () d e t ( ) e t () where 0 d 0 E t [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g] 3KV (F t )d (50) and For r0 v t( ) e t( ) d d d r 0 v t() e t() 0 d r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 v t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 + v t () e t ()! (HV (F t )) + (5) +!, we need to combine the two following two results: r 0 v t () e t () r 0 v t () e t () HV (F t ) + H V (F t )H (F t ) d (5)! + (HV (F t )) +
12 Combining with Assumption (D), we thus have E[ t (; d) () + ] cd. Second term: t (; d) () = r0 v t( ) r 0 v t() e t( ) e t() : It was shown in the derivations for d the rst term that E[ t (; d) () + ] cd. Third term: t (; d) (3) = d v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) fy t v t ( )g v t ()r 0 e t () e t () fy t v t ()g (53) Similar to the rst term, t (; d) (3) + can be bounded by (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g) (54) v t ()r 0 + e t () e t ()! + v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) v t ()r 0! + e t () d e t ( ) e t () 0 d 0 where E t (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g) 3KV (F t )d and For d vt( )r0 e t( ) e t( ) d v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) d v t ( )r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) 0 d (55) v t ()r 0 + e t () e t ()! (H H (F t )) + (56) v t()r 0 e t() e t()! +, we need to combine the following two results: v t ()r 0 e t () e t () v t ()r 0 e t () e t () H V (F t )H (F t ) + H H (F t ) + H H (F t ) d (57) +! (H H (F t )) + (58) Combining with Assumption (D), we thus have E[ t (; d) (3) + ] cd. Fourth term: t (; d) (4) = vt( )r0 e t( ) e t( ) d v t()r 0 e t() e t() : It was shown in the deriva- tions for the third term that E[ t (; d) (4) + ] cd.
13 Fifth term: t (; d) (5) = d r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) fy t v t ( )gy t r 0 e t () e t () fy t v t ()gy t (59) Similar to the rst and third terms, t (; d) (5) + can be bounded by where (fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()g + fv t ( ) Y t v t ()g + fv t () < Y t v t ( )g) (60) jy t j + r 0 + e t () e t ()! + jy t j + r 0 e t ( ) r 0! + e t () d e t ( ) e t () 0 d 0 E t [fv t ( ) < Y t v t ()gjy t j + ] = Z vt() v t( ) jyj + f t (y)dy Kjv t ( )j + jv t ( ) v t ()j (6) KV (F t ) + V (F t ) KV (F t ) + V (F t )d and similarly, E hfv t ( ) < Y t v t ()gjy t j + jf t i and E hfv t () < Y t v t ( )gjy t j + jf t i KV (F t ) + V (F t )d (6) KV (F t ) + V (F t )d Further For r0 e t( ) e t( ) d d 0 d r 0 e t () e t () H H (F t ) (63) r 0 e t() e t()! +, we need to combine the following two results: r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) 0 d r 0 e t () e t () r 0 e t () e t () H3 H (F t ) + H H (F t ) d (64)! + H H (F t ) + Combining with Assumption (D), we thus have E[ t (d) (5) + ] cd. Sixth term: We have d d (6) t (; d) = r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 e t () e t () d r 0 e t ( ) e t ( ) r 0 e t () e t () (65) r 0 e t () e t () H H (F t ) + HH (F t ) d (66)! + (HH (F t )) + 3
14 Combining with Assumption (D), we thus have E[ t (; d) (6) + ] cd. Thus E[t (; d) (i) ] + cd, 8i = ; ; :::; 6; proving the lemma. Lemma 6 Under Assumptions -, Eg t ( 0 ) + M, for all t and some M > 0. Proof of Lemma 6. Eg t ( 0 ) + 4 (E + r 0 v t ( 0 ) e t ( 0 ) + E + E +E v t ( 0 )r 0 e t ( 0 ) e t ( 0 ) r 0 e t ( 0 ) e t ( 0 ) r 0 e t ( 0 ) e t ( 0 ) + Y t v t ( 0 ) + Y t v t ( 0 ) + Y t v t ( 0 ) Y t + ) 4 ( + + )+ H + E hv (F t ) +i + ( + )+ H + E hh (F t ) +i + + H4+ E[H (F t ) + jy t j + ] +H + E hh (F t ) +io M since all the four expectations in the penultimate inequality are nite by assumption (D). Assumption N4 of Weiss (99) only requires Eg t ( 0 ) M, which is implied by the above. Lemma 7 Under Assumptions -, we have T = P T t= g t( 0 ) A 0 E g t ( 0 )g t ( 0 ) 0 : d! N (0; A0 ) as T! ; where Proof of Lemma 7. First note that the sequence g t ( 0 ) is stationary by Assumption (B)(ii), and has zero mean. Under Assumption (F) and Lemma 6, we can use Corollary 5. of Hall and Heyde (980) and the Cramer-Wold device to obtain the result. 4
15 Appendix SA.: Estimating a GARCH(,) model by FZ loss minimization In this appendix we show that we can estimate the popular GARCH(,) model via FZ loss minimization. We then verify that the assumptions required to show this are implied by the Assumptions - in the main paper. Throughout, jjxjj refers to the Euclidean norm if x is a vector and to the Frobenius norm if x is a matrix. Appendix SA..: Model speci cation Assume that the data generating process for Y t is: Y t = t t ; t? t ; t s iid F (0; ) (67) t =! t + 0 Y t Under this model, the conditional VaR and ES of Y t at a probability level (0; ), that is V ar (Y t jf t ) and ES (Y t jf t ), follow the dynamics: 4 V ar (Y t jf t ) ES (Y t jf t ) 3 5 = 4 c 0 ES (Y t jf t ) b 0 t where c 0 F ()=E[ t j t F ()] b 0 E[ t j t F ()] 3 5 (68) We x the level (0; ) throughout this appendix. Our goal is to estimate the parameter vector 0 = [ 0 ; 0 ; b 0 ; c 0 ] by minimizing the FZ loss function. Note that the parameters do not include! 0 because only two of the three parameters! 0 ; b 0 ; 0 are identi able under this model. A detailed discussion about the identi cation of the GARCH model via FZ loss minimization is provided in Section SA..3 of this appendix. In the simulation study (Section 4 of the main paper), for estimating the GARCH model via FZ loss minimization, we x! at its true value! 0. Put = [; ; b; c] and its true value is 5
16 0 = [ 0 ; 0 ; b 0 ; c 0 ]. We will estimate 0 by where L T () = T T arg min L T () TX L F Z0 (Y t ; v t (); e t (); ) t= t () =! 0 + t () + Y t v t () = c e t () e t () = b t () and the FZ loss function L F Z0 is de ned in equation (6) Appendix SA..: Assumptions to estimate GARCH by FZ minimization GARCH Assumption : F has zero mean, unit variance, nite fourth moment, and a unique -quantile, which is non-positive. It has density f () that satis es f () K and jf ( ) f ( )j Kj j. The distributions we often assume for the innovations of GARCH model, lie the normal distribution or t-distribution with degrees of freedom greater than four, all satisfy this assumption. GARCH Assumption : 0 <! 0 <. The true parameter vector 0 = [ 0 ; 0 ; b 0 ; c 0 ] R 4 is in the interior of, a compact and convex parameter space. Speci cally, for any vector [; ; b; c], assume that ( ), ( ) for some constant > 0, c ( ), B b B, for some constants ; B ; B > 0, and ( + ) + E 4 t 3 for some constant 3 > 0: This assumption is similar to Assumption of Lumsdaine (996) with the exception of the third condition on the parameter vector, which is used to validate the mixing condition in Assumption (F), which we now discuss. It is not hard to show that Y t ; v t () ; e t () ; r 0 v t () ; r 0 e t () Y t ; t () t () = and thus we need to consider the mixing properties of Y t ; t () t () = : Using De nition 3 of Carrasco and Chen (00), Y t ; t () t () = ; t 0 is a generalized hidden Marov model with a hidden chain t () t () = ; t 0 : By their Proposition 4, if t () t () = is stationary and -mixing then Y t ; t () t () = is stationary and -mixing with a decay rate at least as fast as that of t () t () = ; t 0 : 6
17 We use Proposition 3 of Carrasco and Chen (00). First, we express t () t () = ; t 0 in the polynomial random coe cient form: 0 0 t () A 0 A t + t () = 0 0 t t () = A (69) First, note that by GARCH Assumption t satis es their condition (e) and that by GARCH Assumption 0, their Assumption A 0 is obviously satis ed. For Assumption0 A ; the spectral ra- dius 0 A is < : For Assumption A 0 ; the spectral radius t + 0 A is h i E t + = ( + ) + E 4 t < :Then, if t () t () = is initialized from the invariant distribution (which we did in our simulations) then t () t () = ; t 0 strictly stationary and -mixing with exponential decay. It is well nown that -mixing implies -mixing and so Assumption (F) of the paper is satis ed. is GARCH Assumptions imply that the distribution and density of Y t conditional on F t satisfy Assumption (B)(i). Since Y t = t t and t F t, F t (xjf t ) =F ( x t ) f t (xjf t ) = t f ( x t ) Thus, jf t (xjf t )j K p!0 ; since t =! 0 + t + y t! 0 > 0 jf t ( jf t ) f t ( jf t )j = jf ( ) f ( )j K t t t j j K j j t! 0 GARCH Assumption 3: EjY t j 5+ <, for some > 0. GARCH Assumption 3 is needed to show the uniform LLN Assumption (A) of the paper and also to ensure the moment conditions in Assumptions (C) and (D). For the GARCH model it is possible to obtain the results of the paper under a weaer version of Assumption (D). An inspection of the proofs shows that it is su cient to replace Assumption (D) by the following. (i) E Assumption (D ): For some 0 < < and 8 t : h V (F t ) 3+i h ; E H (F t ) 3+i ; E hv (F t ) 3+ i ; E i hh (F t ) 3+ K; 7
18 h (ii) E h (iii) E H (F t V (F t ) + V (F t ) +i K; ) + jy t j +i ; E h H (F t ) + jy t j +i K: Assumption (D ) is in turn ful lled if EjY t j 4+ <, for some > 0. For reasons of brevity, we omit the arguments and wor instead with the stronger GARCH Assumption 3. Appendix SA..3: Identi cation In Theorem, we discussed the identi cation of a general dynamic model for ES and VaR model by minimizing the FZ loss, with the form of a general model given by equation (4). Under correct speci cation of the model, that is (V ar (Y t jf t ); ES (Y t jf t )) = (v t ( 0 ); e t ( 0 )) 8 t a.s., the condition required for identi cation is given by Assumption (B) (iv): Pr v t () = v t ( 0 ) \ e t () = e t ( 0 ) = ; 8 t ) = 0 : This assumption is equivalent to Pr v t () = v t ( 0 ) \ e t () = e t ( 0 ); 8t = In the case of the GARCH model we have: Pr fv t () = v t ( 0 )g \ fe t () = e t ( 0 )g; 8t = ) Pr fc e t () = c 0 e t ( 0 )g \ fe t () = e t ( 0 )g; 8t = ) Pr fc = c 0 g \ fb t () = b 0 t ( 0 )g; 8t = )c = c 0 ; Pr b t () = b 0 t ( 0 ); 8t = )c = c 0 ; Pr b (! + t () + Y t ) = b 0(! t ( 0 ) + 0 Y t ); 8t = )c = c 0 ; Pr b! + b 0 t ( 0 ) + b Y t = b 0! b 0 t ( 0 ) + b 0 0 Y t ; 8t = where the third line holds because e t ( 0 ) = b 0 t ( 0 ) and we assume that b 0 < 0, thus e t ( 0 ) < 0, and in the last line, we replaced b t () by b 0 t (0 ) because we started with b t () = b 0 t ( 0 ); 8t almost surely. Since the GARCH model assumes that Y t j t ( 0 ) F (0; t (0 )), Pr b! + b 0 t ( 0 ) + b Y t = b 0! b 0 t ( 0 ) + b 0 0 Y t ; 8t = ) Pr fb = b 0 0 g \ fb! + b 0 t ( 0 ) = b 0! b 0 t ( 0 )g; 8t = ) b = b 0 0 ; Pr b! + b 0 t ( 0 ) = b 0! b 0 t ( 0 ); 8t = If b 0 6= 0b 0 and P r b! + b 0 t (0 ) = b 0! b 0 t (0 ); 8t = hold at the same time, 8
19 then we have Pr t ( 0 ) = b 0! 0 b! b 0 0 b 0 ) Pr! t ( 0 ) + 0 Y ; 8t = t = b 0! 0 b! b 0 0 b 0 ; 8t = This contradicts the assumption of the GARCH model,that Y t j t ( 0 ) F (0; t (0 )). Thus, b 0 6= 0b 0 and Pr b! + b 0 t (0 ) = b 0! b 0 t (0 ); 8t = cannot hold at the same time. This means that Pr b! + b 0 t (0 ) = b 0! b 0 t (0 ); 8t = implies b 0 = 0b 0, which further implies that = 0 and b! = b 0! 0. In summary, we have shown that Pr v t () = v t ( 0 ) \ e t () = e t ( 0 ) = ; 8 t )c = c 0 ; b = b 0 0 ; b 0 = 0 b 0; b! = b 0! 0 )c = c 0 ; = 0 ; b = b 0 0 ; b! = b 0! 0 Therefore, Assumption (B)(iv) holds if we normalize one of the three parameters b; ;!. choose to normalize!. We Appendix SA..4: Uniform LLN In this section, we show that under the GARCH assumptions we have made in Section SA.., Assumption (A) is satis ed: L F Z0 (Y t ; v t () ; e t () ; ) obeys the uniform law of large numbers. Since the parameter space is assumed to be compact, we can establish the uniform LLN by combining the pointwise LLN with stochastic equicontinuity. Appendix SA..4.: LLN The LLN is based on Davidson (994, Corollary 9.3) which we restate here as Theorem 4 for convenience. Theorem 4 (Davidson) Suppose that (X t ) tn satis es: EjX t j + < for some > 0 tn and (X t ) tn is mixing with P m= m (m) =(+) <, then n nx (X t E[X t ]) L! 0: t= 9
20 Under Assumption (F), which we discussed in the context of the GARCH model in Section SA.. above, implies that L F Z0 (Y t ; v t () ; e t ()) is -mixing with a decay rate no slower than that required by Theorem 4. Also, L F Z0 (Y t ; v t () ; e t ()) is strictly stationary as we have shown that Y t ; t () t () =@ is strictly stationary. We then need only show that EjL F Z0 (Y t ; v t (); e t (); )j + < jl F Z0 (Y t ; v t (); e t (); )j =j e t () fy t v t ()g(v t () Y t ) + v t() e t () + log( e t()) j =j v t() e t () ( fy t v t ()g) + Y t e t () fy t v t ()g + log( e t ()) j =jc ( c( + ) + j log( fy t v t ()g) By Cr-inequality, it is su cient to show that t b fy t v t ()g + log( b t ()) j b)j + + j tj jbj + j log tj Ej t j + < and Ej log t j + < : The moment condition on t is directly implied by the structure of the model and GARCH Assumption 3. Recall that t =! 0 + t +y t! 0 > 0. Therefore, if t < then j log t j j log p! 0 j, and if t then j log t j t. In summary, j log t j j log p! 0 j+ t. Therefore, by Cr-inequality Ej log t j + E(j log p! 0 j + t ) + + (j log p! 0 j + + E + t ): h Thus, a su cient condition for Ej log t j + < is E + t i < which is implied by GARCH Assumption 3. Hence, L F Z0 (Y t ; v t () ; e t ()) obeys the law of large numbers for any xed by Theorem 4. Appendix SA..4.: Stochastic equicontinuity The stochastic equicontinuity condition is derived using Davidson (994, Theorem.0) which we restate here as Theorem 5 for convenience. 0
21 Theorem 5 (Davidson) Let Q n () be the objective function for an M-estimator. Suppose there exists N N such that jq n () Q n ( 0 )j a n h( 0 ); a.s. holds for all ; 0 and n N, where h is a deterministic function with h(x) # 0 as x # 0, and a n = O p (). Then (Q n ) nn is stochastically equicontinuous. Observe that fy t v t ()g(v t () Y t ) = (v t() Y t + jv t () Y t j): (70) Let = [ ; ; b ; c ]; = [ ; ; b ; c ]. Then, using (70), we obtain fy t v t ( )g(v t ( ) Y t ) fy t v t ( )g(v t ( ) Y t ) e t ( ) e t ( ) = v t ( ) Y t + jv t ( ) Y t j v t ( ) Y t + jv t ( ) Y t j e t ( ) e t ( ) v t ( ) Y t v t ( ) Y t e t ( ) e t ( ) + jv t ( ) Y t j jv t ( ) Y t j e t ( ) e t ( ) (7) v t ( ) Y t v t ( ) Y t e t ( ) e t ( ) (7) = v t ( ) v t ( ) Yt Y t e t ( ) e t ( ) e t ( ) e t ( ) = c t c t b b jc c j + jb b j j jb b j t j: The inequality between (7) and (7) holds because jv t ( ) Y t j jv t ( ) Y t j e t ( ) e t ( ) = jv t ( ) Y t j je t ( )j = jv t ( ) Y t j je t ( )j v t ( ) Y t e t ( ) jv t ( ) Y t j je t ( )j jv t ( ) Y t j je t ( )j v t ( ) Y t e t ( ) : By Taylor s theorem, j log( e t ( )) log( e t ( ))j = e t ( ) re t( )
22 for some between and. Since, re t () =b r t () + t () [0; 0; ; 0] ) re t() je t ()j jbj r t () + t () jbj r t() + t () jb t ()j r t() t () + jbj ; we obtain Therefore, rt ( j log( e t ( )) log( e t ( ))j ) t ( ) + jb j : jl F Z0 (Y t ; v t ( ); e t ( ); ) L F Z0 (Y t ; v t ( ); e t ( ); )j jc c j + jb b j rt ( j jb b j t j + jc c j + ) t ( ) j tj B B + r t( ) t ( ) + jb j The last inequality holds because by GARCH Assumption, jb j; jb j; jb j B > 0. Using Lemma 8 in Section SA..5, we obtain " r t () # t () X = = t () (i ) (i )= jy t i j + i= " # X ( ) = =! = 0 (i )( ) (i )= jy t i j + using the bounds on and in GARCH Assumption. De ne " # Z t = X ( ) = =! = 0 (i )( ) (i )= jy t i j + Then, i= jl T ( ) L T ( )j + + B + B i= T TX j t j + T t=! TX Z t : Ej t j = const < and E [Z t ] = const < (because EjY t j = const < by GARCH Assumptions and 3). Then, T P T t= j tj = O p () and T P T t= Z t = O p (). Therefore, by Theorem 5, L T is stochastically equicontinuous. t= Appendix SA..5: Assumptions (C) and (D)
23 We de ne X (t; ) = X (t; ) = X 3 (t; ) = X i= (i ) i Y t X (i ) (i )= jy t i j i= X i=3 (i )(i ) i 3 Yt i i Lemma 8 Under GARCH Assumption, we have r t () X (t; ) + t () r t () [= = X (t; ) + t ()]! 0 r t () [ ( ) 3 + X 3(t; ) + X (t; )] r t ()! = 0 4 Proof of Lemma 8. Therefore, X (t; ) + = = X (t; ) + 4 t ()! 0 +! = 0 [ ( ) 3 + X 3(t; ) + X (t; )] t () =! 0 + t () + Y t =! 0 r t () = "! 0 =( ) + X i= + X (i ) i Y t i; i= X i= i Y t i: (73) i Y t i; 0; 0 =! 0 =( ) + X (t; ); ( t! 0 =( )); 0; 0 (74) r t ()! 0 =( ) + X (t; ) + ( t! 0 =( )) = X (t; ) + t +! 0 X (t; ) + t ; # since + implies =( ) = 0. Furthermore, r t () = r t () 4 P i= (i )i Yt i q t ()!0 + P i= i Yt i 3 + t t 3 5 :
24 For all j, we have (j ) j Yt j q!0 + P (j )j Yt q i= i Yt i j Yt j j = (j ) = (j 3)= jy t j j as all summands in the denominator are positive. This implies " r t () # X = = (i ) (i )= jy t i j + t () i= = [= = X (t; ) + t ()]: Using equation (74), we obtain 3 a a 0 0 r a t () = where a =! 0 ( ) 3 + X (i )(i ) i 3 Yt a = a = X i= i=3 (i ) i Y t Thus, since the Frobenius norm is always less than the sum of the absolute values of the matrix entries, r t () [ ( ) 3 + X 3(t; ) + X (t; )]: Using that r t () = r t ()=( t ()), we nd that therefore,! 0 r t () = r0 t ()r t () t () + r t () = r0 t ()r t () + r t () t () t () t () ; r t () r t() t () i + r t () t () Since t! 0 > 0 and using our previous results, we obtain the claimed bound on r t (). i 4
25 Lemma 9 Under GARCH Assumption, it holds that jv t ()j V (F t ) = B S (F t ) re t () H (F t ) = B S (F t ) + S (F t ) rv t () V (F t ) = H (F t ) + V (F t ) r e t () H (F t ) = B S 3 (F t ) + S (F t ) r v t () V (F t ) = H (F t ) + H (F t ); where v u X S (F t ) = t!0 + ( ) i Yt i= S (F t ) = [( ) = = X (t; ) + S (F t )] S 3 (F t ) =! = 0 4 i ( )X (t; ) + X (t; ) + 4 S (F t ) +! = 0 [! ( )X 3 (t; ) + X (t; )]: Proof of Lemma 9. As a function in and, t () is increasing in both arguments, see equation (73), and, in fact, it does not depend on the parameters b and c. Therefore, t () S (F t ). The quantities X (t; ), X (t; ), X 3 (t; ) de ned in the beginning of this section are all increasing in, and thus, bounded by X (t; ), X (t; ), X 3 (t; ), respectively. Recall that jbj B under GARCH Assumption. The rst inequality holds because jv t ()j je t ()j = jbj t (). The remaining ones are implied by Lemma 8 and re t () = b r t () + t () [0; 0; ; 0] jbj r t () + t () rv t () = c re t () + e t () [0; 0; 0; ] re t () + jbj t () r e t () = br t () + [0; 0; ; 0] 0 r t () + r 0 t ()[0; 0; ; 0] jbj r t () + r t () r v t () = cr e t () + [0; 0; 0; ] 0 re t () + r 0 e t ()[0; 0; 0; ] r e t () + re t (): 5
26 Lemma 0 Let fx i g in be a sequence of random variables and de ne X = P i= a ijx i j, where a i > 0 for all i N and P i= a i <. Let p >. If in EjX i j p K < for some constant K, then EjXj p ( P i= a i) p K. Proof of Lemma 0. X = By Jensen s inequality, EjZj p jezj p. We rewrite X as X a i jx i j = i=! X X a i Note that P i= (P i= a i) a i =, namely f( P i= a i) a i g i= i= i=! X a i a i jx i j: i= is a probability measure. Then, using Jensen s inequality, 0 X X p A p 0 0 a j j= i= j= a j A p 0 X a i jx i A p a j j= i= 0 X j= a j A a i jx i j p : Thus, 0 X E [X p A p a j j= i= 0 X j= a j A 0 X a i EjX i j A p a j j= i= 0 X j= a j A 0 X a i K j= a j A p K Lemma Under GARCH Assumption and for any p >, p ; : : : ; p 6 > 0, the following statements hold for all t: () If EjY t j p <, then the following quantities are all nite: E[V p (F t )], E[V p (F t )], E[H p (F t )], E[V p= (F t )], E[H p= (F t )]. () If p = p + p + p 3 + p 4 + p 5 + p 6 and EjY t j p <, then E[V p (F t )V p (F t )H p 3 (F t )V p 4 (F t )H p 5 (F t )jy t j p 6 ] < : (3) If EjY t j 4+ < for some > 0, all the moment conditions in Assumption (D) could be satis ed. Proof of Lemma. Part () follows by combining Lemma 9 with Lemma 0, and part () is a consequence of part () and Hölder s inequality. Lemma implies that GARCH Assumption 3 implies Assumption (D) of the paper. 6
27 Appendix SA..6: Assumption (E) D 0 is the Hessian of the expected loss at 0, so it is positive semi-de nite. Let x = (x ; : : : ; x 4 ) 0 R 4 such that x 0 D 0 x = 0. This implies that x 0 rv t ( 0 ) = 0, x 0 re t ( 0 ) = 0 almost surely. We have, x 0 rv t ( 0 ) = cx 0 re t ( 0 ) + x 4 e t ( 0 ). Therefore, x 4 = 0. Furthermore, t ( 0 )x 0 re t ( 0 ) = t ( 0 )bx 0 r t ( 0 ) + x 3 t ( 0 ) = bx 0 r t ( 0 ) + x 3 t ( 0 ) = 0; a.s. (75) The stationarity of fy t g implies that t ( 0 ) is stationary. Therefore it also holds that bx 0 r t ( 0 ) + x 3 t ( 0 ) = 0; a.s. (76) Computing (75) (76), we obtain that a.s. 0 = bx 0 [ t ( 0 ); Y t ; 0; 0] 0 + x 3 (! 0 + Y t ) = (bx + x 3 )Y t + (! 0 x 3 + bx t ( 0 )): (77) By the assumption that Y t j t F (0; t (0 )) and that t (0 ) =! t (0 )+ 0 Y t, we can conclude from the above equation that x = x = x 3 = 0. Thus D 0 is positive de nite. Appendix SA..7: Assumption (G) We now verify this assumption for the GARCH(,) model. Set a = bc; so that v t = a t : Then for T 5, a necessary condition for Y t = v t (), t = ; : : : ; T is given by the set of equations or, equivalently, Xt Yt = a t 0 + a t (! 0 + Y0 ) + a t (! 0 + Y ); t = ; : : : ; 4 = Y = a 0 + a (! 0 + Y 0 ) (78) Y = Y + a (! 0 + Y ) (79) Y 3 = Y + a (! 0 + Y ) (80) Y 4 = Y 3 + a (! 0 + Y 3 ): (8) Solving equations (79)-(8) for and equating the results, we obtain a = Y 4 Y Y 3! 0 Y Y = Y 4 3 Y Y 4 Y3 Y : (8) 7
28 Therefore, a necessary condition such that Y t = v t (), t = ; : : : ; T for some parameter is that (Y ; : : : ; Y T ) lies in the set p (0) = f(y ; :::; Y T ) R T jp(y ; :::; Y T ) = 0g, where p is the polynomial function p(y ; : : : ; Y T ) = (Y 4 Y Y 3 )(Y 3 Y ) (Y 4 3 Y Y 4 )(Y Y ): The set p (0) has Hausdor dimension less than T. Therefore, as the distribution of (Y ; : : : ; Y T ) is assumed to be absolutely continuous from GARCH Assumption, we obtain the claim with K = 4. Appendix SA..8: Summary We summarize the arguments showing that Assumption and of the paper are satis ed under GARCH Assumptions 3. Assumption : Part (A) holds as it has been shown in Section SA..4. that the uniform law of large number holds under our GARCH Assumptions. Part (B)(i)-(ii) are satis ed under GARCH Assumptions -. Part (B)(iii) is easy to chec. Concerning Part (B)(iv), we have shown in Section SA..3 that the GARCH model is identi able when! is normalized. Assumption : Part (A)(i) is easy to chec, (ii) is satis ed by GARCH Assumption. Part (B)(i) is satis ed by GARCH Assumption, (ii) is clearly weaer than GARCH Assumption 3. Part (C)(i) follows easily from t ()! 0 > 0 and the bounds on the parameter jbj. Part (C)(ii) has been shown in Lemma 9. Part (D) is implied by Lemma. Part (E) is discussed in Section SA..6. Part (F) is satis ed under GARCH Assumptions 3 as discussed in Section SA.., and Part (G) is satis ed by GARCH Assumption as discussed in Section SA..7. 8
29 Appendix SA.3: Additional tables Table S: Finite-sample performance of (Q)MLE T = 500 T = 5000!! Panel A: N(0,) innovations True Median Avg bias 0.0 (0.0) (0.005) St dev Coverage Panel B: Sew t (5,-0.5) innovations True Median Avg bias 0.07 (0.03) (0.008) 0.00 St dev Coverage Notes: This table presents results from 000 replications of the estimation of the parameters of a GARCH(,) model, using the Normal lielihood. In Panel A the innovations are standard Normal, and so estimation is then ML. In Panel B the innovations are standardized sew t; and so estimation is QML. Details are described in Section 4 of the main paper. The top row of each panel presents the true values of the parameters. The second, third, and fourth rows present the median estimated parameters, the average bias, and the standard deviation (across simulations) of the estimated parameters. The last row of each panel presents the coverage rates for 95% con dence intervals constructed using estimated standard errors. 9
30 Table S: Simulation results for Normal innovations, estimation by CAViaR T = 500 T = 5000 a a = 0:0 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:05 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:05 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:0 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:0 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage Notes: This table presents results from 000 replications of the estimation of VaR from a GARCH(,) DGP with standard Normal innovations. Details are described in Section 4 of the main paper. The top row of each panel presents the true values of the parameters. The second, third, and fourth rows present the median estimated parameters, the average bias, and the standard deviation (across simulations) of the estimated parameters. The last row of each panel presents the coverage rates for 95% con dence intervals constructed using estimated standard errors. 30
31 Table S3: Simulation results for sew t innovations, estimation by CAViaR T = 500 T = 5000 a a = 0:0 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:05 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:05 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:0 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage = 0:0 True Median Avg bias St dev Coverage Notes: This table presents results from 000 replications of the estimation of VaR from a GARCH(,) DGP with sew t innovations. Details are described in Section 4 of the main paper. The top row of each panel presents the true values of the parameters. The second, third, and fourth rows present the median estimated parameters, the average bias, and the standard deviation (across simulations) of the estimated parameters. The last row of each panel presents the coverage rates for 95% con dence intervals constructed using estimated standard errors. 3
32 Table S4: Diebold-Mariano t-statistics on average out-of-sample loss di erences for the DJIA, NIKKEI and FTSE00 (alpha=0.05) RW5 RW50 RW500 G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel A: DJIA RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel B: NIKKEI RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Table continued on next page. 3
33 Table S4 (cont d): Diebold-Mariano t-statistics on average out-of-sample loss di erences for the DJIA, NIKKEI and FTSE00 (alpha=0.05) RW5 RW50 RW500 G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel C: FTSE RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Notes: This table presents t-statistics from Diebold-Mariano tests comparing the average losses, using the FZ0 loss function, over the out-of-sample period from January 000 to December 06, for ten di erent forecasting models. A positive value indicates that the row model has higher average loss than the column model. Values greater than.96 in absolute value indicate that the average loss di erence is signi cantly di erent from zero at the 95% con dence level. Values along the main diagonal are all identically zero and are omitted for interpretability. The rst three rows correspond to rolling window forecasts, the next three rows correspond to GARCH forecasts based on di erent models for the standardized residuals, and the last four rows correspond to models introduced in Section of the main paper. 33
34 Table S5: Out-of-sample average losses and goodness-of- t tests (alpha=0.05) Average loss GoF p-values: VaR GoF p-values: ES S&P DJIA NIK FTSE S&P DJIA NIK FTSE S&P DJIA NIK FTSE RW RW RW GCH-N GCH-St GCH-EDF FZ-F FZ-F GCH-FZ Hybrid Notes: The left panel of this table presents the average losses, using the FZ0 loss function, for four daily equity return series, over the out-of-sample period from January 000 to December 06, for ten di erent forecasting models. The lowest average loss in each column is highlighted in bold, the second-lowest is highlighted in italics. The rst three rows correspond to rolling window forecasts, the next three rows correspond to GARCH forecasts based on di erent models for the standardized residuals, and the last four rows correspond to models introduced in Section of the main paper. The middle and right panels of this table present p-values from goodness-of- t tests of the VaR and ES forecasts respectively. Values that are greater than 0.0 (indicating no evidence against optimality at the 0.0 level) are in bold, and values between 0.05 and 0.0 are in italics. 34
35 Table S6: Diebold-Mariano t-statistics on average out-of-sample loss di erences for the S&P 500, DJIA, NIKKEI and FTSE00 (alpha=0.05) RW5 RW50 RW500 G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel A: S&P 500 RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel B: DJIA RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Table continued on next page. 35
36 Table S6 (cont d): Diebold-Mariano t-statistics on average out-of-sample loss di erences for the S&P 500, DJIA, NIKKEI and FTSE00 (alpha=0.05) RW5 RW50 RW500 G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel C: NIKKEI RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Panel D: FTSE RW RW RW G-N G-St G-EDF FZ-F FZ-F G-FZ Hybrid Notes: This table presents t-statistics from Diebold-Mariano tests comparing the average losses, using the FZ0 loss function, over the out-of-sample period from January 000 to December 06, for ten di erent forecasting models. A positive value indicates that the row model has higher average loss than the column model. Values greater than.96 in absolute value indicate that the average loss di erence is signi cantly di erent from zero at the 95% con dence level. Values along the main diagonal are all identically zero and are omitted for interpretability. The rst three rows correspond to rolling window forecasts, the next three rows correspond to GARCH forecasts based on di erent models for the standardized residuals, and the last four rows correspond to models introduced in Section of the main paper. 36
37 References [] Carrasco, M. and X. Chen, 00, Mixing and moment properties of various GARCH and stochastic volatility models, Econometric Theory, 8(), [] Davidson, J. 994, Stochastic Limit Theory: An Introduction for Econometricians. Oxford University Press. [3] Lumsdaine, R., 996, Consistency and asymptotic normality of the quasi-maximum lielihood estimator in IGARCH(,) and covariance stationary GARCH(,) models, Econometrica, 64,
Dynamic Semiparametric Models for Expected Shortfall (and Value-at-Risk)
Supplemental Appendix to: Dynamic Semiparametric Models for Expected Shortfall (and Value-at-Ris) Andrew J. Patton Johanna F. Ziegel Rui Chen Due University University of Bern Due University 30 April 08
More informationNotes on Time Series Modeling
Notes on Time Series Modeling Garey Ramey University of California, San Diego January 17 1 Stationary processes De nition A stochastic process is any set of random variables y t indexed by t T : fy t g
More informationGMM-based inference in the AR(1) panel data model for parameter values where local identi cation fails
GMM-based inference in the AR() panel data model for parameter values where local identi cation fails Edith Madsen entre for Applied Microeconometrics (AM) Department of Economics, University of openhagen,
More informationSupplemental Material 1 for On Optimal Inference in the Linear IV Model
Supplemental Material 1 for On Optimal Inference in the Linear IV Model Donald W. K. Andrews Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics Yale University Vadim Marmer Vancouver School of Economics University
More informationTime Series Models and Inference. James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley
Time Series Models and Inference James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley Overview In contrast to the classical linear regression model, in which the components of the
More informationECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Winter 2014 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria
ECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Winter 2014 Instructor: Victor guirregabiria SOLUTION TO FINL EXM Monday, pril 14, 2014. From 9:00am-12:00pm (3 hours) INSTRUCTIONS:
More informationSIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER. Donald W. K. Andrews. August 2011
SIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER By Donald W. K. Andrews August 2011 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1815 COWLES FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS
More informationChapter 1. GMM: Basic Concepts
Chapter 1. GMM: Basic Concepts Contents 1 Motivating Examples 1 1.1 Instrumental variable estimator....................... 1 1.2 Estimating parameters in monetary policy rules.............. 2 1.3 Estimating
More informationTesting for Regime Switching: A Comment
Testing for Regime Switching: A Comment Andrew V. Carter Department of Statistics University of California, Santa Barbara Douglas G. Steigerwald Department of Economics University of California Santa Barbara
More informationMAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION AND UNIFORM INFERENCE WITH SPORADIC IDENTIFICATION FAILURE. Donald W. K. Andrews and Xu Cheng.
MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION AND UNIFORM INFERENCE WITH SPORADIC IDENTIFICATION FAILURE By Donald W. K. Andrews and Xu Cheng October COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 8 COWLES FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH
More informationAdvanced Econometrics II (Part 1)
Advanced Econometrics II (Part 1) Dr. Mehdi Hosseinkouchack Goethe University Frankfurt Summer 2016 osseinkouchack (Goethe University Frankfurt) Review Slides Summer 2016 1 / 22 Distribution For simlicity,
More informationEconomics 241B Review of Limit Theorems for Sequences of Random Variables
Economics 241B Review of Limit Theorems for Sequences of Random Variables Convergence in Distribution The previous de nitions of convergence focus on the outcome sequences of a random variable. Convergence
More informationComparing Nested Predictive Regression Models with Persistent Predictors
Comparing Nested Predictive Regression Models with Persistent Predictors Yan Ge y and ae-hwy Lee z November 29, 24 Abstract his paper is an extension of Clark and McCracken (CM 2, 25, 29) and Clark and
More informationSimple Estimators for Monotone Index Models
Simple Estimators for Monotone Index Models Hyungtaik Ahn Dongguk University, Hidehiko Ichimura University College London, James L. Powell University of California, Berkeley (powell@econ.berkeley.edu)
More informationMC3: Econometric Theory and Methods. Course Notes 4
University College London Department of Economics M.Sc. in Economics MC3: Econometric Theory and Methods Course Notes 4 Notes on maximum likelihood methods Andrew Chesher 25/0/2005 Course Notes 4, Andrew
More informationLECTURE 12 UNIT ROOT, WEAK CONVERGENCE, FUNCTIONAL CLT
MARCH 29, 26 LECTURE 2 UNIT ROOT, WEAK CONVERGENCE, FUNCTIONAL CLT (Davidson (2), Chapter 4; Phillips Lectures on Unit Roots, Cointegration and Nonstationarity; White (999), Chapter 7) Unit root processes
More informationIntroduction: structural econometrics. Jean-Marc Robin
Introduction: structural econometrics Jean-Marc Robin Abstract 1. Descriptive vs structural models 2. Correlation is not causality a. Simultaneity b. Heterogeneity c. Selectivity Descriptive models Consider
More informationSpeci cation of Conditional Expectation Functions
Speci cation of Conditional Expectation Functions Econometrics Douglas G. Steigerwald UC Santa Barbara D. Steigerwald (UCSB) Specifying Expectation Functions 1 / 24 Overview Reference: B. Hansen Econometrics
More informationMath 413/513 Chapter 6 (from Friedberg, Insel, & Spence)
Math 413/513 Chapter 6 (from Friedberg, Insel, & Spence) David Glickenstein December 7, 2015 1 Inner product spaces In this chapter, we will only consider the elds R and C. De nition 1 Let V be a vector
More information2014 Preliminary Examination
014 reliminary Examination 1) Standard error consistency and test statistic asymptotic normality in linear models Consider the model for the observable data y t ; x T t n Y = X + U; (1) where is a k 1
More informationComparing Predictive Accuracy and Model Combination Using Encompassing Test for Nested Quantile Models
Comparing Predictive Accuracy and Model Combination Using Encompassing Test for Nested Quantile Models Yan Ge and Tae-Hwy Lee yz September 214 Abstract This paper extends Clark and McCracken (CM 21, 25,
More informationProblem set 1 - Solutions
EMPIRICAL FINANCE AND FINANCIAL ECONOMETRICS - MODULE (8448) Problem set 1 - Solutions Exercise 1 -Solutions 1. The correct answer is (a). In fact, the process generating daily prices is usually assumed
More informationECONOMETRICS FIELD EXAM Michigan State University May 9, 2008
ECONOMETRICS FIELD EXAM Michigan State University May 9, 2008 Instructions: Answer all four (4) questions. Point totals for each question are given in parenthesis; there are 00 points possible. Within
More informationECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Spring 2013 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria
ECONOMETRICS II (ECO 2401S) University of Toronto. Department of Economics. Spring 2013 Instructor: Victor Aguirregabiria SOLUTION TO FINAL EXAM Friday, April 12, 2013. From 9:00-12:00 (3 hours) INSTRUCTIONS:
More informationRank Estimation of Partially Linear Index Models
Rank Estimation of Partially Linear Index Models Jason Abrevaya University of Texas at Austin Youngki Shin University of Western Ontario October 2008 Preliminary Do not distribute Abstract We consider
More informationEconomics 620, Lecture 9: Asymptotics III: Maximum Likelihood Estimation
Economics 620, Lecture 9: Asymptotics III: Maximum Likelihood Estimation Nicholas M. Kiefer Cornell University Professor N. M. Kiefer (Cornell University) Lecture 9: Asymptotics III(MLE) 1 / 20 Jensen
More informationThe Asymptotic Variance of Semi-parametric Estimators with Generated Regressors
The Asymptotic Variance of Semi-parametric stimators with Generated Regressors Jinyong Hahn Department of conomics, UCLA Geert Ridder Department of conomics, USC October 7, 00 Abstract We study the asymptotic
More informationSimple Estimators for Semiparametric Multinomial Choice Models
Simple Estimators for Semiparametric Multinomial Choice Models James L. Powell and Paul A. Ruud University of California, Berkeley March 2008 Preliminary and Incomplete Comments Welcome Abstract This paper
More informationNonparametric Identi cation and Estimation of Truncated Regression Models with Heteroskedasticity
Nonparametric Identi cation and Estimation of Truncated Regression Models with Heteroskedasticity Songnian Chen a, Xun Lu a, Xianbo Zhou b and Yahong Zhou c a Department of Economics, Hong Kong University
More informationSIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER. Donald W. K. Andrews. August 2011 Revised March 2012
SIMILAR-ON-THE-BOUNDARY TESTS FOR MOMENT INEQUALITIES EXIST, BUT HAVE POOR POWER By Donald W. K. Andrews August 2011 Revised March 2012 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1815R COWLES FOUNDATION FOR
More informationStochastic Processes (Master degree in Engineering) Franco Flandoli
Stochastic Processes (Master degree in Engineering) Franco Flandoli Contents Preface v Chapter. Preliminaries of Probability. Transformation of densities. About covariance matrices 3 3. Gaussian vectors
More information3 Random Samples from Normal Distributions
3 Random Samples from Normal Distributions Statistical theory for random samples drawn from normal distributions is very important, partly because a great deal is known about its various associated distributions
More informationChapter 2. Dynamic panel data models
Chapter 2. Dynamic panel data models School of Economics and Management - University of Geneva Christophe Hurlin, Université of Orléans University of Orléans April 2018 C. Hurlin (University of Orléans)
More informationEstimating the Number of Common Factors in Serially Dependent Approximate Factor Models
Estimating the Number of Common Factors in Serially Dependent Approximate Factor Models Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy y Bureau of Economic Analysis Chirok Han Korea University February 7, 202 Donggyu Sul University
More informationGMM estimation of spatial panels
MRA Munich ersonal ReEc Archive GMM estimation of spatial panels Francesco Moscone and Elisa Tosetti Brunel University 7. April 009 Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/637/ MRA aper No. 637, posted
More informationGENERIC RESULTS FOR ESTABLISHING THE ASYMPTOTIC SIZE OF CONFIDENCE SETS AND TESTS. Donald W.K. Andrews, Xu Cheng and Patrik Guggenberger.
GENERIC RESULTS FOR ESTABLISHING THE ASYMPTOTIC SIZE OF CONFIDENCE SETS AND TESTS By Donald W.K. Andrews, Xu Cheng and Patrik Guggenberger August 2011 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1813 COWLES
More informationTime is discrete and indexed by t =0; 1;:::;T,whereT<1. An individual is interested in maximizing an objective function given by. tu(x t ;a t ); (0.
Chapter 0 Discrete Time Dynamic Programming 0.1 The Finite Horizon Case Time is discrete and indexed by t =0; 1;:::;T,whereT
More informationConsistent estimation of the memory parameter for nonlinear time series
Consistent estimation of the memory parameter for nonlinear time series Violetta Dalla, Liudas Giraitis and Javier Hidalgo London School of Economics, University of ork, London School of Economics 18 August,
More informationStochastic Processes
Introduction and Techniques Lecture 4 in Financial Mathematics UiO-STK4510 Autumn 2015 Teacher: S. Ortiz-Latorre Stochastic Processes 1 Stochastic Processes De nition 1 Let (E; E) be a measurable space
More informationMath 443/543 Graph Theory Notes 5: Graphs as matrices, spectral graph theory, and PageRank
Math 443/543 Graph Theory Notes 5: Graphs as matrices, spectral graph theory, and PageRank David Glickenstein November 3, 4 Representing graphs as matrices It will sometimes be useful to represent graphs
More informationRobust Con dence Intervals in Nonlinear Regression under Weak Identi cation
Robust Con dence Intervals in Nonlinear Regression under Weak Identi cation Xu Cheng y Department of Economics Yale University First Draft: August, 27 This Version: December 28 Abstract In this paper,
More informationBayesian Modeling of Conditional Distributions
Bayesian Modeling of Conditional Distributions John Geweke University of Iowa Indiana University Department of Economics February 27, 2007 Outline Motivation Model description Methods of inference Earnings
More informationOn Standard Inference for GMM with Seeming Local Identi cation Failure
On Standard Inference for GMM with Seeming Local Identi cation Failure Ji Hyung Lee y Zhipeng Liao z First Version: April 4; This Version: December, 4 Abstract This paper studies the GMM estimation and
More informationSpatial panels: random components vs. xed e ects
Spatial panels: random components vs. xed e ects Lung-fei Lee Department of Economics Ohio State University l eeecon.ohio-state.edu Jihai Yu Department of Economics University of Kentucky jihai.yuuky.edu
More informationTests for Cointegration, Cobreaking and Cotrending in a System of Trending Variables
Tests for Cointegration, Cobreaking and Cotrending in a System of Trending Variables Josep Lluís Carrion-i-Silvestre University of Barcelona Dukpa Kim y Korea University May 4, 28 Abstract We consider
More informationWarped Products. by Peter Petersen. We shall de ne as few concepts as possible. A tangent vector always has the local coordinate expansion
Warped Products by Peter Petersen De nitions We shall de ne as few concepts as possible. A tangent vector always has the local coordinate expansion a function the di erential v = dx i (v) df = f dxi We
More informationParametric Inference on Strong Dependence
Parametric Inference on Strong Dependence Peter M. Robinson London School of Economics Based on joint work with Javier Hualde: Javier Hualde and Peter M. Robinson: Gaussian Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood Estimation
More informationElements of Asymptotic Theory. James L. Powell Department of Economics University of California, Berkeley
Elements of Asymtotic Theory James L. Powell Deartment of Economics University of California, Berkeley Objectives of Asymtotic Theory While exact results are available for, say, the distribution of the
More informationCAE Working Paper # Fixed-b Asymptotic Approximation of the Sampling Behavior of Nonparametric Spectral Density Estimators
CAE Working Paper #06-04 Fixed-b Asymptotic Approximation of the Sampling Behavior of Nonparametric Spectral Density Estimators by Nigar Hashimzade and Timothy Vogelsang January 2006. Fixed-b Asymptotic
More information11. Bootstrap Methods
11. Bootstrap Methods c A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi 2006 These transparencies were prepared in 20043. They can be used as an adjunct to Chapter 11 of our subsequent book Microeconometrics: Methods
More informationNotes on Generalized Method of Moments Estimation
Notes on Generalized Method of Moments Estimation c Bronwyn H. Hall March 1996 (revised February 1999) 1. Introduction These notes are a non-technical introduction to the method of estimation popularized
More informationRobust Solutions to Multi-Objective Linear Programs with Uncertain Data
Robust Solutions to Multi-Objective Linear Programs with Uncertain Data M.A. Goberna yz V. Jeyakumar x G. Li x J. Vicente-Pérez x Revised Version: October 1, 2014 Abstract In this paper we examine multi-objective
More information7 Semiparametric Methods and Partially Linear Regression
7 Semiparametric Metods and Partially Linear Regression 7. Overview A model is called semiparametric if it is described by and were is nite-dimensional (e.g. parametric) and is in nite-dimensional (nonparametric).
More informationEstimation under Ambiguity (Very preliminary)
Estimation under Ambiguity (Very preliminary) Ra aella Giacomini, Toru Kitagawa, y and Harald Uhlig z Abstract To perform a Bayesian analysis for a set-identi ed model, two distinct approaches exist; the
More information4.3 - Linear Combinations and Independence of Vectors
- Linear Combinations and Independence of Vectors De nitions, Theorems, and Examples De nition 1 A vector v in a vector space V is called a linear combination of the vectors u 1, u,,u k in V if v can be
More informationA Note on the Closed-form Identi cation of Regression Models with a Mismeasured Binary Regressor
A Note on the Closed-form Identi cation of Regression Models with a Mismeasured Binary Regressor Xiaohong Chen Yale University Yingyao Hu y Johns Hopkins University Arthur Lewbel z Boston College First
More informationUniversity of Toronto
A Limit Result for the Prior Predictive by Michael Evans Department of Statistics University of Toronto and Gun Ho Jang Department of Statistics University of Toronto Technical Report No. 1004 April 15,
More informationESTIMATION AND INFERENCE WITH WEAK, SEMI-STRONG, AND STRONG IDENTIFICATION. Donald W. K. Andrews and Xu Cheng. October 2010 Revised July 2011
ESTIMATION AND INFERENCE WITH WEAK, SEMI-STRONG, AND STRONG IDENTIFICATION By Donald W. K. Andrews and Xu Cheng October 1 Revised July 11 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION PAPER NO. 1773R COWLES FOUNDATION
More informationA Conditional-Heteroskedasticity-Robust Con dence Interval for the Autoregressive Parameter
A Conditional-Heteroskedasticity-Robust Con dence Interval for the Autoregressive Parameter Donald W. K. Andrews Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics Yale University Patrik Guggenberger Department
More informationExercises Chapter 4 Statistical Hypothesis Testing
Exercises Chapter 4 Statistical Hypothesis Testing Advanced Econometrics - HEC Lausanne Christophe Hurlin University of Orléans December 5, 013 Christophe Hurlin (University of Orléans) Advanced Econometrics
More informationarxiv: v1 [q-fin.ec] 17 Jul 2017
Dynamic Semiparametric Models for Expected Shortfall (and Value-at-Risk) arxiv:1707.05108v1 [q-fin.ec] 17 Jul 2017 Andrew J. Patton Johanna F. Ziegel Rui Chen Duke University University of Bern Duke University
More informationControl Functions in Nonseparable Simultaneous Equations Models 1
Control Functions in Nonseparable Simultaneous Equations Models 1 Richard Blundell 2 UCL & IFS and Rosa L. Matzkin 3 UCLA June 2013 Abstract The control function approach (Heckman and Robb (1985)) in a
More informationChapter 6: Endogeneity and Instrumental Variables (IV) estimator
Chapter 6: Endogeneity and Instrumental Variables (IV) estimator Advanced Econometrics - HEC Lausanne Christophe Hurlin University of Orléans December 15, 2013 Christophe Hurlin (University of Orléans)
More informationEstimation and Inference with Weak Identi cation
Estimation and Inference with Weak Identi cation Donald W. K. Andrews Cowles Foundation Yale University Xu Cheng Department of Economics University of Pennsylvania First Draft: August, 2007 Revised: March
More informationSampling Distributions and Asymptotics Part II
Sampling Distributions and Asymptotics Part II Insan TUNALI Econ 511 - Econometrics I Koç University 18 October 2018 I. Tunal (Koç University) Week 5 18 October 2018 1 / 29 Lecture Outline v Sampling Distributions
More informationTHE FOURTH-ORDER BESSEL-TYPE DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION
THE FOURTH-ORDER BESSEL-TYPE DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION JYOTI DAS, W.N. EVERITT, D.B. HINTON, L.L. LITTLEJOHN, AND C. MARKETT Abstract. The Bessel-type functions, structured as extensions of the classical Bessel
More informationNotes on Asymptotic Theory: Convergence in Probability and Distribution Introduction to Econometric Theory Econ. 770
Notes on Asymptotic Theory: Convergence in Probability and Distribution Introduction to Econometric Theory Econ. 770 Jonathan B. Hill Dept. of Economics University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill November
More informationMarkov-Switching Models with Endogenous Explanatory Variables. Chang-Jin Kim 1
Markov-Switching Models with Endogenous Explanatory Variables by Chang-Jin Kim 1 Dept. of Economics, Korea University and Dept. of Economics, University of Washington First draft: August, 2002 This version:
More informationEstimation and Inference with Weak, Semi-strong, and Strong Identi cation
Estimation and Inference with Weak, Semi-strong, and Strong Identi cation Donald W. K. Andrews Cowles Foundation Yale University Xu Cheng Department of Economics University of Pennsylvania This Version:
More informationElicitability and backtesting
Elicitability and backtesting Johanna F. Ziegel University of Bern joint work with Natalia Nolde, UBC 17 November 2017 Research Seminar at the Institute for Statistics and Mathematics, WU Vienna 1 / 32
More informationGaussian processes. Basic Properties VAG002-
Gaussian processes The class of Gaussian processes is one of the most widely used families of stochastic processes for modeling dependent data observed over time, or space, or time and space. The popularity
More informationON THE ASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR OF THE PRINCIPAL EIGENVALUES OF SOME ELLIPTIC PROBLEMS
ON THE ASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR OF THE PRINCIPAL EIGENVALUES OF SOME ELLIPTIC PROBLEMS TOMAS GODOY, JEAN-PIERRE GOSSE, AND SOFIA PACKA Abstract. This paper is concerned with nonselfadjoint elliptic problems
More informationA New Approach to Robust Inference in Cointegration
A New Approach to Robust Inference in Cointegration Sainan Jin Guanghua School of Management, Peking University Peter C. B. Phillips Cowles Foundation, Yale University, University of Auckland & University
More informationWidely applicable periodicity results for higher order di erence equations
Widely applicable periodicity results for higher order di erence equations István Gy½ori, László Horváth Department of Mathematics University of Pannonia 800 Veszprém, Egyetem u. 10., Hungary E-mail: gyori@almos.uni-pannon.hu
More informationLinear Algebra. Linear Algebra. Chih-Wei Yi. Dept. of Computer Science National Chiao Tung University. November 12, 2008
Linear Algebra Chih-Wei Yi Dept. of Computer Science National Chiao Tung University November, 008 Section De nition and Examples Section De nition and Examples Section De nition and Examples De nition
More informationMA 8101 Stokastiske metoder i systemteori
MA 811 Stokastiske metoder i systemteori AUTUMN TRM 3 Suggested solution with some extra comments The exam had a list of useful formulae attached. This list has been added here as well. 1 Problem In this
More informationLecture 6: Contraction mapping, inverse and implicit function theorems
Lecture 6: Contraction mapping, inverse and implicit function theorems 1 The contraction mapping theorem De nition 11 Let X be a metric space, with metric d If f : X! X and if there is a number 2 (0; 1)
More informationMeasuring robustness
Measuring robustness 1 Introduction While in the classical approach to statistics one aims at estimates which have desirable properties at an exactly speci ed model, the aim of robust methods is loosely
More informationLikelihood inference for a nonstationary fractional autoregressive model
Likelihood inference for a nonstationary fractional autoregressive model Søren Johansen y University of Copenhagen and CREATES and Morten Ørregaard Nielsen z Cornell University and CREATES Preliminary
More informationSpectral representations and ergodic theorems for stationary stochastic processes
AMS 263 Stochastic Processes (Fall 2005) Instructor: Athanasios Kottas Spectral representations and ergodic theorems for stationary stochastic processes Stationary stochastic processes Theory and methods
More informationFluid Heuristics, Lyapunov Bounds and E cient Importance Sampling for a Heavy-tailed G/G/1 Queue
Fluid Heuristics, Lyapunov Bounds and E cient Importance Sampling for a Heavy-tailed G/G/1 Queue J. Blanchet, P. Glynn, and J. C. Liu. September, 2007 Abstract We develop a strongly e cient rare-event
More informationCAE Working Paper # A New Asymptotic Theory for Heteroskedasticity-Autocorrelation Robust Tests. Nicholas M. Kiefer and Timothy J.
CAE Working Paper #05-08 A New Asymptotic Theory for Heteroskedasticity-Autocorrelation Robust Tests by Nicholas M. Kiefer and Timothy J. Vogelsang January 2005. A New Asymptotic Theory for Heteroskedasticity-Autocorrelation
More informationIntroduction to Linear Algebra. Tyrone L. Vincent
Introduction to Linear Algebra Tyrone L. Vincent Engineering Division, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO E-mail address: tvincent@mines.edu URL: http://egweb.mines.edu/~tvincent Contents Chapter. Revew
More informationNonlinear Programming (NLP)
Natalia Lazzati Mathematics for Economics (Part I) Note 6: Nonlinear Programming - Unconstrained Optimization Note 6 is based on de la Fuente (2000, Ch. 7), Madden (1986, Ch. 3 and 5) and Simon and Blume
More informationECON2285: Mathematical Economics
ECON2285: Mathematical Economics Yulei Luo Economics, HKU September 17, 2018 Luo, Y. (Economics, HKU) ME September 17, 2018 1 / 46 Static Optimization and Extreme Values In this topic, we will study goal
More informationA CONDITIONAL-HETEROSKEDASTICITY-ROBUST CONFIDENCE INTERVAL FOR THE AUTOREGRESSIVE PARAMETER. Donald W.K. Andrews and Patrik Guggenberger
A CONDITIONAL-HETEROSKEDASTICITY-ROBUST CONFIDENCE INTERVAL FOR THE AUTOREGRESSIVE PARAMETER By Donald W.K. Andrews and Patrik Guggenberger August 2011 Revised December 2012 COWLES FOUNDATION DISCUSSION
More informationLikelihood Ratio Based Test for the Exogeneity and the Relevance of Instrumental Variables
Likelihood Ratio Based est for the Exogeneity and the Relevance of Instrumental Variables Dukpa Kim y Yoonseok Lee z September [under revision] Abstract his paper develops a test for the exogeneity and
More informationReal Analysis Problems
Real Analysis Problems Cristian E. Gutiérrez September 14, 29 1 1 CONTINUITY 1 Continuity Problem 1.1 Let r n be the sequence of rational numbers and Prove that f(x) = 1. f is continuous on the irrationals.
More informationThe properties of L p -GMM estimators
The properties of L p -GMM estimators Robert de Jong and Chirok Han Michigan State University February 2000 Abstract This paper considers Generalized Method of Moment-type estimators for which a criterion
More informationConsistent estimation of asset pricing models using generalized spectral estimator
Consistent estimation of asset pricing models using generalized spectral estimator Jinho Choi Indiana University April 0, 009 Work in progress Abstract This paper essentially extends the generalized spectral
More informationMATHEMATICAL PROGRAMMING I
MATHEMATICAL PROGRAMMING I Books There is no single course text, but there are many useful books, some more mathematical, others written at a more applied level. A selection is as follows: Bazaraa, Jarvis
More informationApproximately Most Powerful Tests for Moment Inequalities
Approximately Most Powerful Tests for Moment Inequalities Richard C. Chiburis Department of Economics, Princeton University September 26, 2008 Abstract The existing literature on testing moment inequalities
More informationUsing OLS to Estimate and Test for Structural Changes in Models with Endogenous Regressors
Using OLS to Estimate and Test for Structural Changes in Models with Endogenous Regressors Pierre Perron y Boston University Yohei Yamamoto z Hitotsubashi University August 22, 2011; Revised November 16,
More informationDichotomy Of Poincare Maps And Boundedness Of Some Cauchy Sequences
Applied Mathematics E-Notes, 2(202), 4-22 c ISSN 607-250 Available free at mirror sites of http://www.math.nthu.edu.tw/amen/ Dichotomy Of Poincare Maps And Boundedness Of Some Cauchy Sequences Abar Zada
More informationStochastic integral. Introduction. Ito integral. References. Appendices Stochastic Calculus I. Geneviève Gauthier.
Ito 8-646-8 Calculus I Geneviève Gauthier HEC Montréal Riemann Ito The Ito The theories of stochastic and stochastic di erential equations have initially been developed by Kiyosi Ito around 194 (one of
More informationEconomics 241B Estimation with Instruments
Economics 241B Estimation with Instruments Measurement Error Measurement error is de ned as the error resulting from the measurement of a variable. At some level, every variable is measured with error.
More informationStatistical analysis of time series: Gibbs measures and chains with complete connections
Statistical analysis of time series: Gibbs measures and chains with complete connections Rui Vilela Mendes (Institute) 1 / 38 Statistical analysis of time series data Time series X 2 Y : the state space
More informationEconomics 620, Lecture 8: Asymptotics I
Economics 620, Lecture 8: Asymptotics I Nicholas M. Kiefer Cornell University Professor N. M. Kiefer (Cornell University) Lecture 8: Asymptotics I 1 / 17 We are interested in the properties of estimators
More informationX (z) = n= 1. Ã! X (z) x [n] X (z) = Z fx [n]g x [n] = Z 1 fx (z)g. r n x [n] ª e jnω
3 The z-transform ² Two advantages with the z-transform:. The z-transform is a generalization of the Fourier transform for discrete-time signals; which encompasses a broader class of sequences. The z-transform
More informationConvergence of Square Root Ensemble Kalman Filters in the Large Ensemble Limit
Convergence of Square Root Ensemble Kalman Filters in the Large Ensemble Limit Evan Kwiatkowski, Jan Mandel University of Colorado Denver December 11, 2014 OUTLINE 2 Data Assimilation Bayesian Estimation
More information