Is the Hamilton regression filter really superior to Hodrick–Prescott detrending?

IF 0.7 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Macroeconomic Dynamics Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1017/s136510052400018x
Reiner Franke, Jiri Kukacka, Stephen Sacht
{"title":"Is the Hamilton regression filter really superior to Hodrick–Prescott detrending?","authors":"Reiner Franke, Jiri Kukacka, Stephen Sacht","doi":"10.1017/s136510052400018x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An article published in 2018 by J.D. Hamilton gained significant attention due to its provocative title, “Why you should never use the Hodrick-Prescott filter.” Additionally, an alternative method for detrending, the Hamilton regression filter (HRF), was introduced. His work was frequently interpreted as a proposal to substitute the Hodrick–Prescott (HP) filter with HRF, therefore utilizing and understanding it similarly as HP detrending. This research disputes this perspective, particularly in relation to quarterly business cycle data on aggregate output. Focusing on economic fluctuations in the United States, this study generates a large amount of artificial data that follow a known pattern and include both a trend and cyclical component. The objective is to assess the effectiveness of a certain detrending approach in accurately identifying the real decomposition of the data. In addition to the standard HP smoothing parameter of <jats:inline-formula> <jats:alternatives> <jats:inline-graphic xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" mime-subtype=\"png\" xlink:href=\"S136510052400018X_inline1.png\"/> <jats:tex-math> $\\lambda = 1600$ </jats:tex-math> </jats:alternatives> </jats:inline-formula>, the study also examines values of <jats:inline-formula> <jats:alternatives> <jats:inline-graphic xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" mime-subtype=\"png\" xlink:href=\"S136510052400018X_inline2.png\"/> <jats:tex-math> $\\lambda ^{\\star }$ </jats:tex-math> </jats:alternatives> </jats:inline-formula> from earlier research that are seven to twelve times greater. Based on three unique statistical measures of the discrepancy between the estimated and real trends, it is evident that both versions of HP significantly surpass those of HRF. Additionally, HP with <jats:inline-formula> <jats:alternatives> <jats:inline-graphic xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" mime-subtype=\"png\" xlink:href=\"S136510052400018X_inline3.png\"/> <jats:tex-math> $\\lambda ^{\\star }$ </jats:tex-math> </jats:alternatives> </jats:inline-formula> consistently outperforms HP-1600.","PeriodicalId":18078,"journal":{"name":"Macroeconomic Dynamics","volume":"2012 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Macroeconomic Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s136510052400018x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An article published in 2018 by J.D. Hamilton gained significant attention due to its provocative title, “Why you should never use the Hodrick-Prescott filter.” Additionally, an alternative method for detrending, the Hamilton regression filter (HRF), was introduced. His work was frequently interpreted as a proposal to substitute the Hodrick–Prescott (HP) filter with HRF, therefore utilizing and understanding it similarly as HP detrending. This research disputes this perspective, particularly in relation to quarterly business cycle data on aggregate output. Focusing on economic fluctuations in the United States, this study generates a large amount of artificial data that follow a known pattern and include both a trend and cyclical component. The objective is to assess the effectiveness of a certain detrending approach in accurately identifying the real decomposition of the data. In addition to the standard HP smoothing parameter of $\lambda = 1600$ , the study also examines values of $\lambda ^{\star }$ from earlier research that are seven to twelve times greater. Based on three unique statistical measures of the discrepancy between the estimated and real trends, it is evident that both versions of HP significantly surpass those of HRF. Additionally, HP with $\lambda ^{\star }$ consistently outperforms HP-1600.
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
汉密尔顿回归滤波器真的优于霍德里克-普雷斯科特去趋势法吗?
2018年,J.D. Hamilton发表的一篇文章因其具有煽动性的标题 "为什么你永远不应该使用霍德里克-普雷斯科特滤波器 "而备受关注。此外,还介绍了另一种去趋势方法--汉密尔顿回归滤波器(HRF)。他的研究成果经常被解释为建议用 HRF 代替霍德里克-普雷斯科特(HP)滤波器,因此对 HRF 的使用和理解与 HP 去趋势相似。本研究对这一观点提出了质疑,特别是在有关总产出的季度商业周期数据方面。本研究以美国的经济波动为重点,生成了大量人工数据,这些数据遵循已知模式,既包括趋势成分,也包括周期成分。目的是评估某种去趋势方法在准确识别数据真实分解方面的有效性。除了 $\lambda = 1600$ 的标准 HP 平滑参数外,本研究还考察了早期研究中大 7 到 12 倍的 $\lambda ^{\star }$ 值。根据对估计趋势和实际趋势之间差异的三种独特统计测量,可以明显看出,两种版本的 HP 都大大超过了 HRF。此外,使用 $\lambda ^{\star }$ 的 HP 始终优于 HP-1600。
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Macroeconomic Dynamics publishes theoretical, empirical or quantitative research of the highest standard. Papers are welcomed from all areas of macroeconomics and from all parts of the world. Major advances in macroeconomics without immediate policy applications will also be accepted, if they show potential for application in the future. Occasional book reviews, announcements, conference proceedings, special issues, interviews, dialogues, and surveys are also published.
期刊最新文献
Nonseparability of credit card services within Divisia monetary aggregates Money growth and inflation in the Euro Area, UK, and USA: measurement issues and recent results Is the working capital channel of the monetary policy quantitatively relevant? A structural estimation approach Uncertainty shocks and monetary policy rules in a small open economy Economic resilience and the dynamics of capital stock
×
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