In-sample return predictive ability of implied moments after alternative treatments
Panel A. Full extrapolation (FE) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
FE with 0% stabilization . | FE with 25% stabilization . | FE with 50% stabilization . | FE with 75% stabilization . | FE with 100% stabilization . | |
r(t−1) | −0.040 | −0.028 | −0.008 | −0.012 | 0.012 |
(−0.37) | (−0.26) | (−0.07) | (−0.11) | (0.11) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.995 | 5.495 | 6.167 | 6.115 | 6.968* |
(1.36) | (1.47) | (1.58) | (1.59) | (1.71) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.443** | 0.664*** | 0.937** | 0.782** | 0.831* |
(2.38) | (2.62) | (2.03) | (1.99) | (1.77) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.020 | 0.066** | 0.086 | 0.064 | 0.093 |
(1.46) | (1.96) | (1.32) | (1.13) | (0.76) | |
Intercept | 0.059* | 0.059* | 0.058* | 0.058* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.82) | (1.78) | (1.79) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0430 | 0.0444 | 0.0460 | 0.0467 | 0.0482 |
Panel A. Full extrapolation (FE) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
FE with 0% stabilization . | FE with 25% stabilization . | FE with 50% stabilization . | FE with 75% stabilization . | FE with 100% stabilization . | |
r(t−1) | −0.040 | −0.028 | −0.008 | −0.012 | 0.012 |
(−0.37) | (−0.26) | (−0.07) | (−0.11) | (0.11) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.995 | 5.495 | 6.167 | 6.115 | 6.968* |
(1.36) | (1.47) | (1.58) | (1.59) | (1.71) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.443** | 0.664*** | 0.937** | 0.782** | 0.831* |
(2.38) | (2.62) | (2.03) | (1.99) | (1.77) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.020 | 0.066** | 0.086 | 0.064 | 0.093 |
(1.46) | (1.96) | (1.32) | (1.13) | (0.76) | |
Intercept | 0.059* | 0.059* | 0.058* | 0.058* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.82) | (1.78) | (1.79) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0430 | 0.0444 | 0.0460 | 0.0467 | 0.0482 |
Panel B. Domain reduction (DRed) and symmetrization (DSym) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
25% DRed . | 50% DRed . | 75% DRed . | DSym (d1) . | DSym (strike price) . | |
r(t−1) | −0.042 | −0.051 | −0.080 | −0.001 | 0.024 |
(−0.38) | (−0.47) | (−0.73) | (0.02) | (0.21) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.972 | 4.667 | 3.592 | 6.745 | 7.848* |
(1.31) | (1.21) | (0.92) | (1.53) | (1.78) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.471** | 0.481*** | 0.504** | 1.629*** | 1.600*** |
(2.26) | (2.30) | (2.39) | (2.65) | (2.83) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.025 | 0.027 | 0.032 | 0.072 | 0.031 |
(1.37) | (1.41) | (1.52) | (0.91) | (0.41) | |
Intercept | 0.060* | 0.060* | 0.062** | 0.057* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.86) | (1.91) | (1.78) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0422 | 0.0413 | 0.0393 | 0.0519 | 0.0561 |
Panel B. Domain reduction (DRed) and symmetrization (DSym) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
25% DRed . | 50% DRed . | 75% DRed . | DSym (d1) . | DSym (strike price) . | |
r(t−1) | −0.042 | −0.051 | −0.080 | −0.001 | 0.024 |
(−0.38) | (−0.47) | (−0.73) | (0.02) | (0.21) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.972 | 4.667 | 3.592 | 6.745 | 7.848* |
(1.31) | (1.21) | (0.92) | (1.53) | (1.78) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.471** | 0.481*** | 0.504** | 1.629*** | 1.600*** |
(2.26) | (2.30) | (2.39) | (2.65) | (2.83) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.025 | 0.027 | 0.032 | 0.072 | 0.031 |
(1.37) | (1.41) | (1.52) | (0.91) | (0.41) | |
Intercept | 0.060* | 0.060* | 0.062** | 0.057* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.86) | (1.91) | (1.78) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0422 | 0.0413 | 0.0393 | 0.0519 | 0.0561 |
Notes: This table presents the results of in-sample return prediction tests conducted under alternative integration domain treatments. Panel A reports the test results where flat extrapolation is applied up to strike prices equivalent to one-third and three times the underlying price. Panel B presents the test results where domain reduction and symmetrization are applied as truncation treatments. The dependent variable, , represents the S&P 500 index log-return on day , expressed as a percentage. , , and denote the daily first-order differences of implied volatility, skewness, and kurtosis estimates on day t, respectively. The Huber–White sandwich estimator is used to estimate standard errors; therefore, the unadjusted is reported. -statistics are presented in parentheses. ***, **, and * indicate statistical significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, respectively.
In-sample return predictive ability of implied moments after alternative treatments
Panel A. Full extrapolation (FE) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
FE with 0% stabilization . | FE with 25% stabilization . | FE with 50% stabilization . | FE with 75% stabilization . | FE with 100% stabilization . | |
r(t−1) | −0.040 | −0.028 | −0.008 | −0.012 | 0.012 |
(−0.37) | (−0.26) | (−0.07) | (−0.11) | (0.11) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.995 | 5.495 | 6.167 | 6.115 | 6.968* |
(1.36) | (1.47) | (1.58) | (1.59) | (1.71) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.443** | 0.664*** | 0.937** | 0.782** | 0.831* |
(2.38) | (2.62) | (2.03) | (1.99) | (1.77) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.020 | 0.066** | 0.086 | 0.064 | 0.093 |
(1.46) | (1.96) | (1.32) | (1.13) | (0.76) | |
Intercept | 0.059* | 0.059* | 0.058* | 0.058* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.82) | (1.78) | (1.79) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0430 | 0.0444 | 0.0460 | 0.0467 | 0.0482 |
Panel A. Full extrapolation (FE) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
FE with 0% stabilization . | FE with 25% stabilization . | FE with 50% stabilization . | FE with 75% stabilization . | FE with 100% stabilization . | |
r(t−1) | −0.040 | −0.028 | −0.008 | −0.012 | 0.012 |
(−0.37) | (−0.26) | (−0.07) | (−0.11) | (0.11) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.995 | 5.495 | 6.167 | 6.115 | 6.968* |
(1.36) | (1.47) | (1.58) | (1.59) | (1.71) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.443** | 0.664*** | 0.937** | 0.782** | 0.831* |
(2.38) | (2.62) | (2.03) | (1.99) | (1.77) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.020 | 0.066** | 0.086 | 0.064 | 0.093 |
(1.46) | (1.96) | (1.32) | (1.13) | (0.76) | |
Intercept | 0.059* | 0.059* | 0.058* | 0.058* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.82) | (1.78) | (1.79) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0430 | 0.0444 | 0.0460 | 0.0467 | 0.0482 |
Panel B. Domain reduction (DRed) and symmetrization (DSym) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
25% DRed . | 50% DRed . | 75% DRed . | DSym (d1) . | DSym (strike price) . | |
r(t−1) | −0.042 | −0.051 | −0.080 | −0.001 | 0.024 |
(−0.38) | (−0.47) | (−0.73) | (0.02) | (0.21) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.972 | 4.667 | 3.592 | 6.745 | 7.848* |
(1.31) | (1.21) | (0.92) | (1.53) | (1.78) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.471** | 0.481*** | 0.504** | 1.629*** | 1.600*** |
(2.26) | (2.30) | (2.39) | (2.65) | (2.83) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.025 | 0.027 | 0.032 | 0.072 | 0.031 |
(1.37) | (1.41) | (1.52) | (0.91) | (0.41) | |
Intercept | 0.060* | 0.060* | 0.062** | 0.057* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.86) | (1.91) | (1.78) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0422 | 0.0413 | 0.0393 | 0.0519 | 0.0561 |
Panel B. Domain reduction (DRed) and symmetrization (DSym) . | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
25% DRed . | 50% DRed . | 75% DRed . | DSym (d1) . | DSym (strike price) . | |
r(t−1) | −0.042 | −0.051 | −0.080 | −0.001 | 0.024 |
(−0.38) | (−0.47) | (−0.73) | (0.02) | (0.21) | |
ΔVOL(t−1) | 4.972 | 4.667 | 3.592 | 6.745 | 7.848* |
(1.31) | (1.21) | (0.92) | (1.53) | (1.78) | |
ΔSKEW(t−1) | 0.471** | 0.481*** | 0.504** | 1.629*** | 1.600*** |
(2.26) | (2.30) | (2.39) | (2.65) | (2.83) | |
ΔKURT(t−1) | 0.025 | 0.027 | 0.032 | 0.072 | 0.031 |
(1.37) | (1.41) | (1.52) | (0.91) | (0.41) | |
Intercept | 0.060* | 0.060* | 0.062** | 0.057* | 0.056* |
(1.85) | (1.86) | (1.91) | (1.78) | (1.74) | |
# of obs. | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 | 1,526 |
R2 | 0.0422 | 0.0413 | 0.0393 | 0.0519 | 0.0561 |
Notes: This table presents the results of in-sample return prediction tests conducted under alternative integration domain treatments. Panel A reports the test results where flat extrapolation is applied up to strike prices equivalent to one-third and three times the underlying price. Panel B presents the test results where domain reduction and symmetrization are applied as truncation treatments. The dependent variable, , represents the S&P 500 index log-return on day , expressed as a percentage. , , and denote the daily first-order differences of implied volatility, skewness, and kurtosis estimates on day t, respectively. The Huber–White sandwich estimator is used to estimate standard errors; therefore, the unadjusted is reported. -statistics are presented in parentheses. ***, **, and * indicate statistical significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% levels, respectively.
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.