IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v37y2021i2p733-758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing forecast accuracy of expectiles and quantiles with the extremal consistent loss functions

Author

Listed:
  • Yen, Yu-Min
  • Yen, Tso-Jung

Abstract

Forecast evaluations aim to choose an accurate forecast for making decisions by using loss functions. However, different loss functions often generate different ranking results for forecasts, which complicates the task of comparisons. In this paper, we develop statistical tests for comparing performances of forecasting expectiles and quantiles of a random variable under consistent loss functions. The test statistics are constructed with the extremal consistent loss functions of Ehm et al. (2016). The null hypothesis of the tests is that a benchmark forecast at least performs equally well as a competing one under all extremal consistent loss functions. It can be shown that if such a null holds, the benchmark will also perform at least equally well as the competitor under all consistent loss functions. Thus under the null, when different consistent loss functions are used, the result that the competitor does not outperform the benchmark will not be altered. We establish asymptotic properties of the proposed test statistics and propose to use the re-centered bootstrap to construct their empirical distributions. Through simulations, we show that the proposed test statistics perform reasonably well. We then apply the proposed method to evaluations of several different forecast methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Yen, Yu-Min & Yen, Tso-Jung, 2021. "Testing forecast accuracy of expectiles and quantiles with the extremal consistent loss functions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 733-758.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:37:y:2021:i:2:p:733-758
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2020.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207020301424
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2020.09.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomson, William, 1979. "Eliciting production possibilities from a well-informed manager," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 360-380, June.
    2. Ivo Welch & Amit Goyal, 2008. "A Comprehensive Look at The Empirical Performance of Equity Premium Prediction," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(4), pages 1455-1508, July.
    3. Kuan, Chung-Ming & Yeh, Jin-Huei & Hsu, Yu-Chin, 2009. "Assessing value at risk with CARE, the Conditional Autoregressive Expectile models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 150(2), pages 261-270, June.
    4. Gneiting, Tilmann, 2011. "Making and Evaluating Point Forecasts," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 106(494), pages 746-762.
    5. Raffaella Giacomini & Halbert White, 2006. "Tests of Conditional Predictive Ability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 74(6), pages 1545-1578, November.
    6. Oliver Linton & Esfandiar Maasoumi & Yoon-Jae Whang, 2005. "Consistent Testing for Stochastic Dominance under General Sampling Schemes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 735-765.
    7. Werner Ehm & Tilmann Gneiting & Alexander Jordan & Fabian Krüger, 2016. "Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(3), pages 505-562, June.
    8. West, Kenneth D, 1996. "Asymptotic Inference about Predictive Ability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(5), pages 1067-1084, September.
    9. Hansen, Peter Reinhard, 2005. "A Test for Superior Predictive Ability," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 23, pages 365-380, October.
    10. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    11. Graham Elliott & Allan Timmermann & Ivana Komunjer, 2005. "Estimation and Testing of Forecast Rationality under Flexible Loss," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 1107-1125.
    12. Clive W.J. Granger, 1999. "Outline of forecast theory using generalized cost functions," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 1(2), pages 161-173.
    13. Robert F. Engle & Simone Manganelli, 2004. "CAViaR: Conditional Autoregressive Value at Risk by Regression Quantiles," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 22, pages 367-381, October.
    14. Andrew J. Patton, 2020. "Comparing Possibly Misspecified Forecasts," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 796-809, October.
    15. Diebold, Francis X. & Shin, Minchul, 2015. "Assessing point forecast accuracy by stochastic loss distance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 37-38.
    16. Hansen, Bruce E, 1996. "Inference When a Nuisance Parameter Is Not Identified under the Null Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(2), pages 413-430, March.
    17. Koenker, Roger W & Bassett, Gilbert, Jr, 1978. "Regression Quantiles," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(1), pages 33-50, January.
    18. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1998. "Graphical Methods for Investigating the Size and Power of Hypothesis Tests," The Manchester School of Economic & Social Studies, University of Manchester, vol. 66(1), pages 1-26, January.
    19. Linton, Oliver & Whang, Yoon-Jae & Yen, Yu-Min, 2016. "A nonparametric test of a strong leverage hypothesis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 153-186.
    20. Jin, Sainan & Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2017. "Robust Forecast Comparison," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 1306-1351, December.
    21. Patton, Andrew J., 2011. "Volatility forecast comparison using imperfect volatility proxies," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 246-256, January.
    22. Granger, C. W. J. & Newbold, Paul, 1986. "Forecasting Economic Time Series," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780122951831 edited by Shell, Karl.
    23. Halbert White, 2000. "A Reality Check for Data Snooping," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1097-1126, September.
    24. Newey, Whitney K & Powell, James L, 1987. "Asymmetric Least Squares Estimation and Testing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 819-847, July.
    25. Hajo Holzmann & Matthias Eulert, 2014. "The role of the information set for forecasting - with applications to risk management," Papers 1404.7653, arXiv.org.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alexander Henzi & Johanna F Ziegel, 2022. "Valid sequential inference on probability forecast performance [A comparison of the ECMWF, MSC, and NCEP global ensemble prediction systems]," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 109(3), pages 647-663.
    2. Li, Ranran & Hu, Yucai & Heng, Jiani & Chen, Xueli, 2021. "A novel multiscale forecasting model for crude oil price time series," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Candia, Claudio & Herrera, Rodrigo, 2024. "An empirical review of dynamic extreme value models for forecasting value at risk, expected shortfall and expectile," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    2. Patrick Schmidt & Matthias Katzfuss & Tilmann Gneiting, 2021. "Interpretation of point forecasts with unknown directive," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(6), pages 728-743, September.
    3. Gloria González-Rivera & Tae-Hwy Lee, 2007. "Nonlinear Time Series in Financial Forecasting," Working Papers 200803, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2008.
    4. Timo Dimitriadis & Julie Schnaitmann, 2019. "Forecast Encompassing Tests for the Expected Shortfall," Papers 1908.04569, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    5. Mauro Bernardi & Leopoldo Catania, 2016. "Comparison of Value-at-Risk models using the MCS approach," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 579-608, June.
    6. Petropoulos, Fotios & Apiletti, Daniele & Assimakopoulos, Vassilios & Babai, Mohamed Zied & Barrow, Devon K. & Ben Taieb, Souhaib & Bergmeir, Christoph & Bessa, Ricardo J. & Bijak, Jakub & Boylan, Joh, 2022. "Forecasting: theory and practice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 705-871.
      • Fotios Petropoulos & Daniele Apiletti & Vassilios Assimakopoulos & Mohamed Zied Babai & Devon K. Barrow & Souhaib Ben Taieb & Christoph Bergmeir & Ricardo J. Bessa & Jakub Bijak & John E. Boylan & Jet, 2020. "Forecasting: theory and practice," Papers 2012.03854, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    7. Norman R. Swanson & Weiqi Xiong, 2018. "Big data analytics in economics: What have we learned so far, and where should we go from here?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(3), pages 695-746, August.
    8. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    9. Jin, Sainan & Corradi, Valentina & Swanson, Norman R., 2017. "Robust Forecast Comparison," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(6), pages 1306-1351, December.
    10. Raffaella Giacomini & Barbara Rossi, 2013. "Forecasting in macroeconomics," Chapters, in: Nigar Hashimzade & Michael A. Thornton (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Empirical Macroeconomics, chapter 17, pages 381-408, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Busetti, Fabio & Marcucci, Juri, 2013. "Comparing forecast accuracy: A Monte Carlo investigation," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 13-27.
    12. Valentina Corradi & Norman Swanson, 2004. "Bootstrap Procedures for Recursive Estimation Schemes With Applications to Forecast Model Selection," Departmental Working Papers 200418, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    13. Timo Dimitriadis & Xiaochun Liu & Julie Schnaitmann, 2020. "Encompassing Tests for Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Multi-Step Forecasts based on Inference on the Boundary," Papers 2009.07341, arXiv.org.
    14. Şener, Emrah & Baronyan, Sayad & Ali Mengütürk, Levent, 2012. "Ranking the predictive performances of value-at-risk estimation methods," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 849-873.
    15. Fissler Tobias & Ziegel Johanna F., 2021. "On the elicitability of range value at risk," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 38(1-2), pages 25-46, January.
    16. Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinová & Birgit Rudloff, 2021. "Elicitability and identifiability of set-valued measures of systemic risk," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 133-165, January.
    17. Andrea Bastianin & Marzio Galeotti & Matteo Manera, 2019. "Statistical and economic evaluation of time series models for forecasting arrivals at call centers," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 923-955, September.
    18. Werner Ehm & Tilmann Gneiting & Alexander Jordan & Fabian Krüger, 2016. "Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(3), pages 505-562, June.
    19. Li, Jia & Patton, Andrew J., 2018. "Asymptotic inference about predictive accuracy using high frequency data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 223-240.
    20. Sander Barendse & Andrew J. Patton, 2022. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy in the Presence of a Loss Function Shape Parameter," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 1057-1069, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:37:y:2021:i:2:p:733-758. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.