IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jnlbes/v42y2024i4p1367-1378.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing Quantile Forecast Optimality

Author

Listed:
  • Jack Fosten
  • Daniel Gutknecht
  • Marc-Oliver Pohle

Abstract

Quantile forecasts made across multiple horizons have become an important output of many financial institutions, central banks and international organizations. This article proposes misspecification tests for such quantile forecasts that assess optimality over a set of multiple forecast horizons and/or quantiles. The tests build on multiple Mincer-Zarnowitz quantile regressions cast in a moment equality framework. Our main test is for the null hypothesis of autocalibration, a concept which assesses optimality with respect to the information contained in the forecasts themselves. We provide an extension that allows to test for optimality with respect to larger information sets and a multivariate extension. Importantly, our tests do not just inform about general violations of optimality, but may also provide useful insights into specific forms of sub-optimality. A simulation study investigates the finite sample performance of our tests, and two empirical applications to financial returns and U.S. macroeconomic series illustrate that our tests can yield interesting insights into quantile forecast sub-optimality and its causes.

Suggested Citation

  • Jack Fosten & Daniel Gutknecht & Marc-Oliver Pohle, 2024. "Testing Quantile Forecast Optimality," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 1367-1378, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jnlbes:v:42:y:2024:i:4:p:1367-1378
    DOI: 10.1080/07350015.2024.2316091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/07350015.2024.2316091
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/07350015.2024.2316091?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.

    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:taf:jnlbes:v:42:y:2024:i:4:p:1367-1378. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/UBES20 .

    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.