IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ4/2161176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is implied volatility an informationally efficient and effective predictor of future volatility?

Author

Listed:
  • Louis Ederington, Wei Guan

Abstract

ABSTRACT We examine how well implied volatility forecasts future stock market volatility. If markets are efficient and the option pricing model is correct, the implied volatility calculated from option prices should be an unbiased and informationally efficient predictor of future volatility; that is, it should correctly impound all available information, including the asset’s price history. However, numerous studies have found that the implied volatility forecast is biased and/or is not informationally efficient. We re-examine this issue using S&P500 futures options data, a more active market which is less susceptible to measurement error than the OEX options market considered in most previous studies. Our findings are that, first, implied volatility has strong predictive power and generally subsumes the information in historical volatility; second, prediction and efficiency results are quite sensitive to the forecasting horizon and whether the data period covers the October 1987 stock market crash; and third, at least in the S&P500 options market, measurement error due to such factors as bid–ask spreads, non-synchronous price observations and discrete prices does not significantly affect the results.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ4:2161176
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/import/protected/digital_assets/10125/Is_implied_volatility_an_informationally_efficient_and_effective_predictor_of_future_volatility.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

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:rsk:journ4:2161176. 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.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-risk .

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.