Comparing the forecastability of alternative quantitative models: A trading simulation approach in financial engineering

Mei Zheng , Jia Miao
{"title":"Comparing the forecastability of alternative quantitative models: A trading simulation approach in financial engineering","authors":"Mei Zheng ,&nbsp;Jia Miao","doi":"10.1016/j.sepro.2011.11.046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this article, we build Box-Jenkins ARMA model and ARMA-GARCH model to forecast the returns of shanghai stock exchange composite index in financial engineering. Out-of-sample forecasting performances are evaluated to compare the forecastability of the two models. Traditional engineering type of models aim to minimize statistical errors, however, the model with minimum engineering type of statistical errors does not necessarily guarantee maximized trading profits, which is often deemed as the ultimate objective of financial application. The best way to evaluate alternative financial model is therefore to evaluate their trading performance by means of trading simulation.</p><p>We find that both quantitative models are able to forecast the future movements of the market accurately, which yields significant risk adjusted returns compared to the overall market during the out-of-sample period. In addition, although the ARMA-GARCH model is better than the ARMA model theoretically and statistically, the latter outperforms the former with significantly higher trading performances.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101207,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering Procedia","volume":"4 ","pages":"Pages 35-39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.sepro.2011.11.046","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systems Engineering Procedia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211381911001998","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In this article, we build Box-Jenkins ARMA model and ARMA-GARCH model to forecast the returns of shanghai stock exchange composite index in financial engineering. Out-of-sample forecasting performances are evaluated to compare the forecastability of the two models. Traditional engineering type of models aim to minimize statistical errors, however, the model with minimum engineering type of statistical errors does not necessarily guarantee maximized trading profits, which is often deemed as the ultimate objective of financial application. The best way to evaluate alternative financial model is therefore to evaluate their trading performance by means of trading simulation.

We find that both quantitative models are able to forecast the future movements of the market accurately, which yields significant risk adjusted returns compared to the overall market during the out-of-sample period. In addition, although the ARMA-GARCH model is better than the ARMA model theoretically and statistically, the latter outperforms the former with significantly higher trading performances.

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
比较不同定量模型的可预测性:金融工程中的交易模拟方法
本文运用金融工程理论,建立Box-Jenkins ARMA模型和ARMA- garch模型对上证综合指数的收益率进行预测。评估样本外预测性能,比较两种模型的可预测性。传统的工程型模型以统计误差最小化为目标,但工程型统计误差最小的模型并不一定能保证交易利润最大化,而交易利润最大化往往被视为金融应用的最终目标。因此,评估备选金融模型的最佳方法是通过交易模拟来评估其交易绩效。我们发现,这两个定量模型都能够准确地预测市场的未来走势,与样本外期间的整体市场相比,这产生了显著的风险调整回报。此外,尽管ARMA- garch模型在理论和统计上都优于ARMA模型,但后者的交易绩效明显高于ARMA模型。
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
Contents Contents Contents A Variation Coefficient Similarity Measure and Its Application in Emergency Group Decision-making Coherent Distortion Risk Measures in Portfolio Selection
×
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