Are Oil Price Forecasters Finally Right? Regressive Expectations Toward More Fundamental Values of the Oil Price

S. Reitz, Jan‐Christoph Rülke, G. Stadtmann
{"title":"Are Oil Price Forecasters Finally Right? Regressive Expectations Toward More Fundamental Values of the Oil Price","authors":"S. Reitz, Jan‐Christoph Rülke, G. Stadtmann","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2785362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We use oil price forecasts from the Consensus Economic Forecast poll to analyze how forecasters form their expectations. Our findings seem to indicate that the extrapolative as well as the regressive expectation formation hypothesis play a role. Standard measures of forecast accuracy reveal forecasters' underperformance relative to the random walk benchmark. However, this result appears to be biased due to peso problems.","PeriodicalId":233145,"journal":{"name":"Global Commodity Issues (Editor's Choice) eJournal","volume":"18 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Commodity Issues (Editor's Choice) eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2785362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

We use oil price forecasts from the Consensus Economic Forecast poll to analyze how forecasters form their expectations. Our findings seem to indicate that the extrapolative as well as the regressive expectation formation hypothesis play a role. Standard measures of forecast accuracy reveal forecasters' underperformance relative to the random walk benchmark. However, this result appears to be biased due to peso problems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
油价预测者最终是否正确?对油价更基本价值的回归预期
我们利用共识经济预测投票中的油价预测来分析预测者是如何形成其预期的。我们的研究结果似乎表明,预期形成的外推假说和回归假说都在起作用。预测准确性的标准衡量标准显示,相对于随机漫步基准,预测者的表现不佳。然而,由于比索问题,这一结果似乎存在偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
International Oil Market Risk Anticipations and the Cushing Bottleneck: Option-Implied Evidence Can Investors Hedge Energy Risk? Evidence from Asia Mean-Reverting Statistical Arbitrage in Crude Oil Markets Do Cointegrated Commodities Bubble Together? The Case of Hog, Corn, and Soybean Long-Term Swings and Seasonality in Energy Markets
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1