IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2410.04165.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How to Compare Copula Forecasts?

Author

Listed:
  • Tobias Fissler
  • Yannick Hoga

Abstract

This paper lays out a principled approach to compare copula forecasts via strictly consistent scores. We first establish the negative result that, in general, copulas fail to be elicitable, implying that copula predictions cannot sensibly be compared on their own. A notable exception is on Fr\'echet classes, that is, when the marginal distribution structure is given and fixed, in which case we give suitable scores for the copula forecast comparison. As a remedy for the general non-elicitability of copulas, we establish novel multi-objective scores for copula forecast along with marginal forecasts. They give rise to two-step tests of equal or superior predictive ability which admit attribution of the forecast ranking to the accuracy of the copulas or the marginals. Simulations show that our two-step tests work well in terms of size and power. We illustrate our new methodology via an empirical example using copula forecasts for international stock market indices.

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias Fissler & Yannick Hoga, 2024. "How to Compare Copula Forecasts?," Papers 2410.04165, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2410.04165
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2410.04165
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2410.04165. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.