We estimate a number of multivariate regime switching VAR models on a long monthly US data set for eight variables that include excess stock and bond returns, the real T-bill yield, predictors used in the finance literature (default spread and the dividend yield), and three macroeconomic variables (inflation, real industrial production growth, and a measure of real money growth). Heteroskedasticity may be accounted for by making the covariance matrix a function of the regime. We find evidence of four regimes and of time-varying covariances. The best in-sample fit is provided by a four state model in which the VAR(1) component fails to be regime-dependent. We interpret this as evidence that the dynamic linkages between financial markets and the macroeconomy have been stable over time. We show that the four-state model can be helpful in forecasting applications and to provide one-step ahead predicted Sharpe ratios.

We systematically examine the comparative predictive performance of a number of linear and non-linear models for stock and bond returns in the G7 countries. Besides Markov switching, threshold autoregressive (TAR), and smooth transition autoregressive (STAR) regime switching models, we also estimate univariate models in which conditional heteroskedasticity is captured by a GARCH and in which predicted volatilities appear in the conditional mean function. Although we fail to find a consistent winner/out-performer across all countries and markets, it turns out that capturing non-linear effects may be key to improve forecasting. U.S. and U.K. asset return data are "special" in the sense that good predictive performance seems to require that non-linear dynamics be modeled, especially using a Markov switching framework. Although occasionally stock and bond return forecasts for other G7 countries also appear to benefit from non-linear modeling (especially of TAR and STAR type), data from France, Germany, and Italy imply that the best predictive model is often one of the simple benchmarks, such as the random walk and univariate auto-regressions. U.S. and U.K. markets also provide the only data for which we find statistically significant differences between forecasting models. Results appear to be remarkably stable over time, robust to changes in the loss function used in statistical evaluations as well as to the methodology employed to perform pairwise comparisons.

We estimate a number of multivariate regime switching VAR models on a long monthly US data set for eight variables that include excess stock and bond returns, the real T-bill yield, predictors used in the finance literature (default spread and the dividend yield), and three macroeconomic variables (inflation, industrial production growth, and a measure of real money growth). Heteroskedasticity may be accounted for by making the covariance matrix a function of the regime. We find evidence of four regimes and of time-varying covariances. We show that the best in-sample fit is provided by a four state model in which the VAR(1) component fails to be regime-dependent. We interpret this as evidence that the dynamic linkages between financial markets and the macroeconomy have been stable over time. The four-state model can be helpful in forecasting applications and provides one-step ahead predicted Sharpe ratios.

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may AbstractWe systematically examine the comparative predictive performance of a number of alternative linear and non-linear models for stock and bond returns in the G7 countries. Besides Markov switching, threshold autoregressive (TAR), and smooth transition autoregressive (STAR) regime switching (predictive) regression models, we also estimate univariate models in which conditional heteroskedasticity is captured through GARCH, TARCH and EGARCH models and ARCH-in mean effects appear in the conditional mean. Although we fail to find a consistent winner/out-performer across all countries and asset markets, it turns out that capturing non-linear effects is of extreme importance to improve forecasting performance. U.S. and U.K. asset return data are "special" in the sense that good predictive performance seems to loudly ask for models that capture non-linear dynamics, especially of the Markov switching type. Although occasionally also stock and bond return forecasts for other G7 countries appear to benefit from non-linear modeling (especially of TAR and STAR type), data from France, Germany, and Italy express interesting predictive results on the basis of simpler benchmarks. U.S. and U.K. data are also the only two data sets in which we find statistically significant differences between forecasting models. Results appear to be remarkably stable over time, and robust to the specification of the loss function used in statistical evaluations as well as to the methodology employed to perform pairwise comparisons. How to quote or cite this document AbstractWe systematically examine the comparative predictive performance of a number of alternative linear and non-linear models for stock and bond returns in the G7 countries. Besides Markov switching, threshold autoregressive (TAR), and smooth transition autoregressive (STAR) regime switching (predictive) regression models, we also estimate univariate models in which conditional heteroskedasticity is captured through GARCH, TARCH and EGARCH models and ARCH-in mean effects appear in the conditional mean. Although we fail to find a consistent winner/out-performer across all countries and asset markets, it turns out that capturing non-linear effects is of extreme importance to improve forecasting performance. U.S. and U.K. asset return data are "special" in the sense that good predictive performance seems to loudly ask for models that capture non-linear dynamics, especially of the ...

JEL Classification C53, E44, G12, C32 AbstractWe perform a comprehensive examination of the recursive, comparative predictive performance of a number of linear and non-linear models for UK stock and bond returns. We estimate Markov switching, threshold autoregressive (TAR), and smooth transition autoregressive (STR) regime switching models, and a range of linear specifications in addition to univariate models in which conditional heteroskedasticity is captured by GARCH type specifications and in which predicted volatilities appear in the conditional mean. The results demonstrate that U.K. asset returns require non-linear dynamics be modeled. In particular, the evidence in favour of adopting a Markov switching framework is strong. Our results appear robust to the choice of sample period, changes in the adopted loss function and to the methodology employed to test the null hypothesis of equal predictive accuracy across competing models. Guidolin, M, Hyde, S, McMillan, D. and Ono, Sadayuki (2010 How to quote or cite this document AbstractWe perform a comprehensive examination of the recursive, comparative predictive performance of a number of linear and non-linear models for UK stock and bond returns. We estimate Markov switching, threshold autoregressive (TAR), and smooth transition autoregressive (STR) regime switching models, and a range of linear specifications in addition to univariate models in which conditional heteroskedasticity is captured by GARCH type specifications and in which predicted volatilities appear in the conditional mean. The results demonstrate that U.K. asset returns require non-linear dynamics be modeled. In particular, the evidence in favor of adopting a Markov switching framework is strong. Our results appear robust to the choice of sample period, changes in the adopted loss function and to the methodology employed to test the null hypothesis of equal predictive accuracy across competing models.