IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v11y2023i11p197-d1279438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Testing of Models of Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity Used for Prediction of the Volatility of Bulgarian Investment Funds

Author

Listed:
  • Mariana Petrova

    (Department of Information Technologies, St. Cyril and St. Methodius University of Veliko Tarnovo, 2 T. Tarnovski, 5000 Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria
    Institute for Scientific Research, D.A. Tsenov Academy of Economics, 2 Em. Chakarov Str., 5250 Svishtov, Bulgaria)

  • Teodor Todorov

    (Department of Economic Theory and International Economic Relations, St. Cyril and St. Methodius University of Veliko Tarnovo, 2 T. Tarnovski, 5000 Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria)

Abstract

The relevance of the development is determined by the possibility of testing a complex analytical methodology for forecasting the daily volatility of Bulgarian investment funds, which will support the investment community in making adequate investment decisions. The used risk attribution quantification models GARCH (1.1), EGARCH (1.1), GARCH-M (1.1) and TGARCH (1.1) are adapted to predict the volatility of investment funds. The current development focuses on forecasting the risk concentration of investment funds (in Bulgaria) through the testing of complex, analytical and specialized models from the GARCH group. The object of the study includes quantitative analysis, estimation and forecasting of daily volatility through the models GARCH, EGARCH, GARCH-M and TGARCH with specification (1.1). The research covers the net balance sheet value of forty-two investment funds for the period from 13 July 2020 to 13 July 2023, where the results of the research show that according to three of the models GARCH, EGARCH and GARCH-M with the highest risk concentration the investment fund “Golden Lev Index 30” stands out. An exception to the thus formed trend is related to the TGARCH model in which the future conditional volatility is with the “EF Rapid” investment fund. When testing the models, we found that the GARCH model and the EGARCH model successfully optimize the regression parameters of the final equation for all analyzed investment funds, and as a result, valid forecasts are formed. In the case of the remaining two GARCH-M and TGARCH models, the impossibility of applicability of the model for some investment funds was found because of the optimization procedure, in which the parameters of the models have a value of zero. The present study is a unique mechanism for forecasting the daily volatility of Bulgarian investment funds, which further assists investors in risk assessment and is a prerequisite for making adequate and responsible investment decisions. The wide-spectrum toolkit of risk forecasting models allows their testing in investment funds with different risk natures (high-risk, balanced and low-risk). From a research point of view, in future research dedicated to modeling the risk attribution of investment funds, the analytical toolkit can be enriched with the following models: QGARCH, PGARCH, GJR-GARCH, IGARCH, SGARCH, AVGARCH, NGARCH and GAS. From a statistical point of view, we can apply the analyzed models to different probability distributions in order to describe the risky nature of investment funds.

Suggested Citation

  • Mariana Petrova & Teodor Todorov, 2023. "Empirical Testing of Models of Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity Used for Prediction of the Volatility of Bulgarian Investment Funds," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-30, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2023:i:11:p:197-:d:1279438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/11/197/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/11/197/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
    2. McNeil, Alexander J. & Frey, Rudiger, 2000. "Estimation of tail-related risk measures for heteroscedastic financial time series: an extreme value approach," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(3-4), pages 271-300, November.
    3. Anton Gerunov, 2023. "Stock Returns Under Different Market Regimes: An Application of Markov Switching Models to 24 European Indices," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 1, pages 18-35.
    4. Massimiliano Caporin & Michael McAleer, 2006. "Dynamic Asymmetric GARCH," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 385-412.
    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. Cristiana Tudor & Aura Girlovan & Gabriel Robert Saiu & Daniel Dumitru Guse, 2025. "Asymmetric Shocks and Pension Fund Volatility: A GARCH Approach with Macroeconomic Predictors to an Unexplored Emerging Market," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-29, March.

    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. Tim Bollerslev, 2008. "Glossary to ARCH (GARCH)," CREATES Research Papers 2008-49, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    2. Berens, Tobias & Weiß, Gregor N.F. & Wied, Dominik, 2015. "Testing for structural breaks in correlations: Does it improve Value-at-Risk forecasting?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 135-152.
    3. Alex Huang, 2013. "Value at risk estimation by quantile regression and kernel estimator," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 225-251, August.
    4. Dimitrakopoulos, Dimitris N. & Kavussanos, Manolis G. & Spyrou, Spyros I., 2010. "Value at risk models for volatile emerging markets equity portfolios," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 515-526, November.
    5. Torben G. Andersen & Tim Bollerslev & Peter Christoffersen & Francis X. Diebold, 2007. "Practical Volatility and Correlation Modeling for Financial Market Risk Management," NBER Chapters, in: The Risks of Financial Institutions, pages 513-544, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. H. Kaibuchi & Y. Kawasaki & G. Stupfler, 2022. "GARCH-UGH: a bias-reduced approach for dynamic extreme Value-at-Risk estimation in financial time series," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(7), pages 1277-1294, July.
    7. Ra l De Jes s Guti rrez & Lidia E. Carvajal Guti rrez & Oswaldo Garcia Salgado, 2023. "Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Estimation for Mexico s Isthmus Crude Oil Using Long-Memory GARCH-EVT Combined Approaches," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 13(4), pages 467-480, July.
    8. Ji, Hao & Naeem, Muhammad & Zhang, Jing & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2024. "Dynamic dependence and spillover among the energy related ETFs: From the hedging effectiveness perspective," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    9. Timo Dimitriadis & iaochun Liu & Julie Schnaitmann, 2023. "Encompassing Tests for Value at Risk and Expected Shortfall Multistep Forecasts Based on Inference on the Boundary," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 412-444.
    10. Massimiliano Caporin & Michael McAleer, 2011. "Thresholds, news impact surfaces and dynamic asymmetric multivariate GARCH," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 65(2), pages 125-163, May.
    11. Rituparna Sen & Pulkit Mehrotra, 2016. "Modeling Jumps and Volatility of the Indian Stock Market Using High-Frequency Data," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 14(1), pages 137-150, June.
    12. Gerlach, Richard & Wang, Chao, 2020. "Semi-parametric dynamic asymmetric Laplace models for tail risk forecasting, incorporating realized measures," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 489-506.
    13. Herrera, R. & Clements, A.E., 2018. "Point process models for extreme returns: Harnessing implied volatility," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 161-175.
    14. Gonzalo Cortazar & Alejandro Bernales & Diether Beuermann, 2005. "Methodology and Implementation of Value-at-Risk Measures in Emerging Fixed-Income Markets with Infrequent Trading," Finance 0512030, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Zhao, Zifeng & Zhang, Zhengjun & Chen, Rong, 2018. "Modeling maxima with autoregressive conditional Fréchet model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 325-351.
    16. Nikolaos Antonakakis & Ioannis Chatziantoniou & David Gabauer, 2021. "The impact of Euro through time: Exchange rate dynamics under different regimes," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 1375-1408, January.
    17. Weronika Ormaniec & Marcin Pitera & Sajad Safarveisi & Thorsten Schmidt, 2022. "Estimating value at risk: LSTM vs. GARCH," Papers 2207.10539, arXiv.org.
    18. Santos, Douglas G. & Candido, Osvaldo & Tófoli, Paula V., 2022. "Forecasting risk measures using intraday and overnight information," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    19. Hartz, Christoph & Mittnik, Stefan & Paolella, Marc S., 2006. "Accurate Value-at-Risk forecast with the (good old) normal-GARCH model," CFS Working Paper Series 2006/23, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    20. Turan Bali & Panayiotis Theodossiou, 2007. "A conditional-SGT-VaR approach with alternative GARCH models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 241-267, April.

    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:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2023:i:11:p:197-:d:1279438. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.