2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2022.106437
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Natural gas volatility prediction: Fresh evidence from extreme weather and extended GARCH-MIDAS-ES model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 100 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Table 3, the p values of the STL‐GARCH‐W model with the inclusion of weather indicators and the STL‐GJR‐GARCH‐W model are almost bigger than 0.1 for both statistics, indicating that both models exhibit strong forecasting power for NYMEX volatility. This finding is similar to the work of Liang, Xia, et al (2022). Second, the MCS tests for the STL‐GARCH‐W model that includes temperature, precipitation, and solar radiation both have a p value of 1, while the STL‐GJR‐GARCH‐W model that includes wind speed, humidity, and barometric pressure both have a p value of 1, indicating that the STL‐GARCH‐W model has the strongest predictive power when weather indicators have an effect on volatility, while when weather indicators have no significant effect on volatility, the STL‐GJR‐GARCH‐W model has the strongest forecasting power.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…According to Table 3, the p values of the STL‐GARCH‐W model with the inclusion of weather indicators and the STL‐GJR‐GARCH‐W model are almost bigger than 0.1 for both statistics, indicating that both models exhibit strong forecasting power for NYMEX volatility. This finding is similar to the work of Liang, Xia, et al (2022). Second, the MCS tests for the STL‐GARCH‐W model that includes temperature, precipitation, and solar radiation both have a p value of 1, while the STL‐GJR‐GARCH‐W model that includes wind speed, humidity, and barometric pressure both have a p value of 1, indicating that the STL‐GARCH‐W model has the strongest predictive power when weather indicators have an effect on volatility, while when weather indicators have no significant effect on volatility, the STL‐GJR‐GARCH‐W model has the strongest forecasting power.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Nick and Thoenes (2014) examined the main influences on the German natural gas market using a structural VAR approach, finding that temperature and supply shocks affect NGPV. Liang, Xia, et al (2022) Although the close link between weather and natural gas markets has been confirmed in existing literatures, there is a dearth of literature that includes weather indicators directly in NGPV forecasting models. More importantly, the future weather data that we need to use when attempting to forecast NGPV in future periods are unknown and need to be obtained by relying on forecasting techniques.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Additionally, the study explored whether the impact of influencing factors differed among various oil types, including WTI and Brent crude oil. Also (Liang et al, 2022;Raza et al, 2023;Salisu, Gupta, et al, 2022) used the GARCH-MIDAS model to forecast volatility in the commodities space.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So far, the existing literature has mostly focused on the relations between NG and other commodities or securities (see, for instance, [38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47]), as well as on modeling price volatility (e.g., [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55]), demand and supply (e.g., [56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64]), spot prices (e.g., [65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76]) or futures prices of individual contracts (e.g., [77][78][79]). Relatively less attention has been paid to NG futures prices term structure modeling and forecasting and only a few studies have partly tackled the issues we are dealing with.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%