Out-of-sample return forecasting ability of implied moments after stabilization
Panel A. With versus without stabilization . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.27 | −0.25 |
10 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.43 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.14 |
15 | 0.00 | −0.24 | 0.38 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.42 |
20 | 0.00 | −0.13 | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.44 | 0.25 |
25 | 0.00 | −0.07 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.29 |
30 | 0.00 | 0.20 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 0.97 | 0.57 |
35 | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.85 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.60 |
40 | 0.00 | 0.18 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 0.90 | 0.64 |
45 | 0.00 | 0.14 | 0.64 | 0.71 | 0.70 | 0.51 |
50 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.60 | 0.71 | 0.77 | 0.60 |
55 | 0.00 | 0.07 | −0.07 | −0.26 | −0.46 | −1.05 |
60 | 0.00 | 0.02 | −0.08 | −0.27 | −0.49 | −1.02 |
Panel A. With versus without stabilization . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.27 | −0.25 |
10 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.43 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.14 |
15 | 0.00 | −0.24 | 0.38 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.42 |
20 | 0.00 | −0.13 | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.44 | 0.25 |
25 | 0.00 | −0.07 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.29 |
30 | 0.00 | 0.20 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 0.97 | 0.57 |
35 | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.85 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.60 |
40 | 0.00 | 0.18 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 0.90 | 0.64 |
45 | 0.00 | 0.14 | 0.64 | 0.71 | 0.70 | 0.51 |
50 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.60 | 0.71 | 0.77 | 0.60 |
55 | 0.00 | 0.07 | −0.07 | −0.26 | −0.46 | −1.05 |
60 | 0.00 | 0.02 | −0.08 | −0.27 | −0.49 | −1.02 |
Panel B. Model versus historical mean . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | −7.42 | −7.79 | −7.12 | −7.15 | −7.15 | −7.67 |
10 | −2.33 | −2.70 | −1.90 | −1.79 | −1.81 | −2.20 |
15 | 0.18 | −0.05 | 0.56 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.61 |
20 | 0.94 | 0.81 | 1.26 | 1.37 | 1.38 | 1.19 |
25 | 1.08 | 1.01 | 1.45 | 1.53 | 1.54 | 1.37 |
30 | 1.54 | 1.74 | 2.55 | 2.56 | 2.51 | 2.11 |
35 | 2.00 | 2.13 | 2.84 | 2.90 | 2.88 | 2.59 |
40 | 2.33 | 2.51 | 3.18 | 3.25 | 3.23 | 2.98 |
45 | 2.61 | 2.75 | 3.25 | 3.32 | 3.31 | 3.12 |
50 | 3.08 | 3.24 | 3.68 | 3.79 | 3.85 | 3.68 |
55 | −4.37 | −4.30 | −4.44 | −4.63 | −4.83 | −5.42 |
60 | −7.38 | −7.36 | −7.46 | −7.65 | −7.86 | −8.40 |
Panel B. Model versus historical mean . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | −7.42 | −7.79 | −7.12 | −7.15 | −7.15 | −7.67 |
10 | −2.33 | −2.70 | −1.90 | −1.79 | −1.81 | −2.20 |
15 | 0.18 | −0.05 | 0.56 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.61 |
20 | 0.94 | 0.81 | 1.26 | 1.37 | 1.38 | 1.19 |
25 | 1.08 | 1.01 | 1.45 | 1.53 | 1.54 | 1.37 |
30 | 1.54 | 1.74 | 2.55 | 2.56 | 2.51 | 2.11 |
35 | 2.00 | 2.13 | 2.84 | 2.90 | 2.88 | 2.59 |
40 | 2.33 | 2.51 | 3.18 | 3.25 | 3.23 | 2.98 |
45 | 2.61 | 2.75 | 3.25 | 3.32 | 3.31 | 3.12 |
50 | 3.08 | 3.24 | 3.68 | 3.79 | 3.85 | 3.68 |
55 | −4.37 | −4.30 | −4.44 | −4.63 | −4.83 | −5.42 |
60 | −7.38 | −7.36 | −7.46 | −7.65 | −7.86 | −8.40 |
Notes: This table presents the results of the out-of-sample return forecasting ability test. Following Campbell and Thompson (2008), we report the statistic, which is defined as , where is the fitted value derived from a predictive regression estimated through the rolling window that ends at time , and is the benchmark value for the rolling window. Benchmark value is defined as the fitted value estimated without stabilization for Panel A, and the historical mean log-return for Panel B. A positive value of indicates that the predictive regression produces a lower mean squared prediction error than the benchmark value. The value of is expressed as a percentage.
Out-of-sample return forecasting ability of implied moments after stabilization
Panel A. With versus without stabilization . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.27 | −0.25 |
10 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.43 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.14 |
15 | 0.00 | −0.24 | 0.38 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.42 |
20 | 0.00 | −0.13 | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.44 | 0.25 |
25 | 0.00 | −0.07 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.29 |
30 | 0.00 | 0.20 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 0.97 | 0.57 |
35 | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.85 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.60 |
40 | 0.00 | 0.18 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 0.90 | 0.64 |
45 | 0.00 | 0.14 | 0.64 | 0.71 | 0.70 | 0.51 |
50 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.60 | 0.71 | 0.77 | 0.60 |
55 | 0.00 | 0.07 | −0.07 | −0.26 | −0.46 | −1.05 |
60 | 0.00 | 0.02 | −0.08 | −0.27 | −0.49 | −1.02 |
Panel A. With versus without stabilization . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.30 | 0.27 | 0.27 | −0.25 |
10 | 0.00 | −0.37 | 0.43 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.14 |
15 | 0.00 | −0.24 | 0.38 | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.42 |
20 | 0.00 | −0.13 | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.44 | 0.25 |
25 | 0.00 | −0.07 | 0.37 | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.29 |
30 | 0.00 | 0.20 | 1.01 | 1.02 | 0.97 | 0.57 |
35 | 0.00 | 0.13 | 0.85 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.60 |
40 | 0.00 | 0.18 | 0.84 | 0.91 | 0.90 | 0.64 |
45 | 0.00 | 0.14 | 0.64 | 0.71 | 0.70 | 0.51 |
50 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.60 | 0.71 | 0.77 | 0.60 |
55 | 0.00 | 0.07 | −0.07 | −0.26 | −0.46 | −1.05 |
60 | 0.00 | 0.02 | −0.08 | −0.27 | −0.49 | −1.02 |
Panel B. Model versus historical mean . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | −7.42 | −7.79 | −7.12 | −7.15 | −7.15 | −7.67 |
10 | −2.33 | −2.70 | −1.90 | −1.79 | −1.81 | −2.20 |
15 | 0.18 | −0.05 | 0.56 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.61 |
20 | 0.94 | 0.81 | 1.26 | 1.37 | 1.38 | 1.19 |
25 | 1.08 | 1.01 | 1.45 | 1.53 | 1.54 | 1.37 |
30 | 1.54 | 1.74 | 2.55 | 2.56 | 2.51 | 2.11 |
35 | 2.00 | 2.13 | 2.84 | 2.90 | 2.88 | 2.59 |
40 | 2.33 | 2.51 | 3.18 | 3.25 | 3.23 | 2.98 |
45 | 2.61 | 2.75 | 3.25 | 3.32 | 3.31 | 3.12 |
50 | 3.08 | 3.24 | 3.68 | 3.79 | 3.85 | 3.68 |
55 | −4.37 | −4.30 | −4.44 | −4.63 | −4.83 | −5.42 |
60 | −7.38 | −7.36 | −7.46 | −7.65 | −7.86 | −8.40 |
Panel B. Model versus historical mean . | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
. | ||||||
Rolling window length (months) . | No stabilization . | 0% stabilization . | 25% stabilization . | 50% stabilization . | 75% stabilization . | 100% stabilization . |
5 | −7.42 | −7.79 | −7.12 | −7.15 | −7.15 | −7.67 |
10 | −2.33 | −2.70 | −1.90 | −1.79 | −1.81 | −2.20 |
15 | 0.18 | −0.05 | 0.56 | 0.80 | 0.85 | 0.61 |
20 | 0.94 | 0.81 | 1.26 | 1.37 | 1.38 | 1.19 |
25 | 1.08 | 1.01 | 1.45 | 1.53 | 1.54 | 1.37 |
30 | 1.54 | 1.74 | 2.55 | 2.56 | 2.51 | 2.11 |
35 | 2.00 | 2.13 | 2.84 | 2.90 | 2.88 | 2.59 |
40 | 2.33 | 2.51 | 3.18 | 3.25 | 3.23 | 2.98 |
45 | 2.61 | 2.75 | 3.25 | 3.32 | 3.31 | 3.12 |
50 | 3.08 | 3.24 | 3.68 | 3.79 | 3.85 | 3.68 |
55 | −4.37 | −4.30 | −4.44 | −4.63 | −4.83 | −5.42 |
60 | −7.38 | −7.36 | −7.46 | −7.65 | −7.86 | −8.40 |
Notes: This table presents the results of the out-of-sample return forecasting ability test. Following Campbell and Thompson (2008), we report the statistic, which is defined as , where is the fitted value derived from a predictive regression estimated through the rolling window that ends at time , and is the benchmark value for the rolling window. Benchmark value is defined as the fitted value estimated without stabilization for Panel A, and the historical mean log-return for Panel B. A positive value of indicates that the predictive regression produces a lower mean squared prediction error than the benchmark value. The value of is expressed as a percentage.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.