使用仿射与非仿射跳跃扩散模型对原油动态进行实证分析

IF 2.1 2区 经济学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Empirical Finance Pub Date : 2024-06-11 DOI:10.1016/j.jempfin.2024.101519
Katja Ignatieva, Patrick Wong
{"title":"使用仿射与非仿射跳跃扩散模型对原油动态进行实证分析","authors":"Katja Ignatieva,&nbsp;Patrick Wong","doi":"10.1016/j.jempfin.2024.101519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper investigates the dynamics of the United States oil (USO) exchange traded fund (ETF). Daily USO returns are modelled using stochastic volatility (SV) frameworks derived from three different model classes: SV models with contemporaneous jumps in returns and volatility (SVCJ); SV model with jumps in returns only (SVJ); and a pure SV model class without jumps. Six affine and non-affine models are considered within each model class that depend on specification of the drift and the diffusion terms in the variance process, resulting in a total of 18 models that are estimated using particle Markov Chain Monte Carlo (PMCMC) approach. Model evaluation is conducted using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), Bayes factors, probability plots, and deviation measures to assess the discrepancy between the estimated volatility and key benchmarks, the crude oil ETF volatility index (OVX) and the realised volatility (RV). Our analysis indicates that models incorporating jumps, particularly the SVCJ-PLY-0.5 and SVCJ-PLY-1.0, more accurately capture USO dynamics than standard SV models. The SVCJ-PLY-0.5 model ranks highest based on DIC statistics and Bayes factors, and both models excel in aligning their estimated volatility with the OVX and RV benchmarks. Overall, the statistical criteria employed in our comparison favour models with jumps over the standard SV model class, suggesting that models incorporating jumps in both return and variance processes (SVCJ) are superior to those with jumps solely in the return process (SVJ). The affine models SVJ-LIN-0.5 and SVCJ-LIN-0.5 with linear variance drift and square root diffusion that are particularly interesting for theoretical finance applications are highly ranked among considered frameworks, outperforming several non-affine alternatives. Our analysis of the regression model for volatility forecasting reveals a significant predictive accuracy in the evaluated models, demonstrating their effectiveness in anticipating future volatility trends.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15704,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Finance","volume":"78 ","pages":"Article 101519"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927539824000549/pdfft?md5=94a378f12e4d90ee28ed7269c27762d6&pid=1-s2.0-S0927539824000549-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirical analysis of crude oil dynamics using affine vs. non-affine jump-diffusion models\",\"authors\":\"Katja Ignatieva,&nbsp;Patrick Wong\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jempfin.2024.101519\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper investigates the dynamics of the United States oil (USO) exchange traded fund (ETF). Daily USO returns are modelled using stochastic volatility (SV) frameworks derived from three different model classes: SV models with contemporaneous jumps in returns and volatility (SVCJ); SV model with jumps in returns only (SVJ); and a pure SV model class without jumps. Six affine and non-affine models are considered within each model class that depend on specification of the drift and the diffusion terms in the variance process, resulting in a total of 18 models that are estimated using particle Markov Chain Monte Carlo (PMCMC) approach. Model evaluation is conducted using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), Bayes factors, probability plots, and deviation measures to assess the discrepancy between the estimated volatility and key benchmarks, the crude oil ETF volatility index (OVX) and the realised volatility (RV). Our analysis indicates that models incorporating jumps, particularly the SVCJ-PLY-0.5 and SVCJ-PLY-1.0, more accurately capture USO dynamics than standard SV models. The SVCJ-PLY-0.5 model ranks highest based on DIC statistics and Bayes factors, and both models excel in aligning their estimated volatility with the OVX and RV benchmarks. Overall, the statistical criteria employed in our comparison favour models with jumps over the standard SV model class, suggesting that models incorporating jumps in both return and variance processes (SVCJ) are superior to those with jumps solely in the return process (SVJ). The affine models SVJ-LIN-0.5 and SVCJ-LIN-0.5 with linear variance drift and square root diffusion that are particularly interesting for theoretical finance applications are highly ranked among considered frameworks, outperforming several non-affine alternatives. Our analysis of the regression model for volatility forecasting reveals a significant predictive accuracy in the evaluated models, demonstrating their effectiveness in anticipating future volatility trends.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15704,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Empirical Finance\",\"volume\":\"78 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101519\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927539824000549/pdfft?md5=94a378f12e4d90ee28ed7269c27762d6&pid=1-s2.0-S0927539824000549-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Empirical Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927539824000549\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Finance","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0927539824000549","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究了美国石油(USO)交易所交易基金(ETF)的动态。每日 USO 回报使用从三种不同模型类别中得出的随机波动率(SV)框架进行建模:具有收益率和波动率同期跳变的 SV 模型(SVCJ);仅具有收益率跳变的 SV 模型(SVJ);以及不具有跳变的纯 SV 模型类。每个模型类别中都考虑了六个仿射和非仿射模型,这些模型取决于方差过程中漂移项和扩散项的规格,因此总共有 18 个模型,我们使用粒子马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗(PMCMC)方法对这些模型进行了估计。模型评估采用偏差信息标准(DIC)、贝叶斯因子、概率图和偏差度量来评估估计波动率与主要基准(原油 ETF 波动率指数(OVX)和实际波动率(RV))之间的差异。我们的分析表明,与标准 SV 模型相比,包含跳跃的模型,尤其是 SVCJ-PLY-0.5 和 SVCJ-PLY-1.0,能更准确地捕捉 USO 动态。根据 DIC 统计量和贝叶斯系数,SVCJ-PLY-0.5 模型的排名最高,这两个模型在使其估计波动率与 OVX 和 RV 基准保持一致方面表现出色。总体而言,我们在比较中采用的统计标准更倾向于采用跳跃模型,而不是标准的 SV 模型,这表明在收益和方差过程中都包含跳跃的模型(SVCJ)优于仅在收益过程中包含 跳跃的模型(SVJ)。仿射模型 SVJ-LIN-0.5 和 SVCJ-LIN-0.5,带有线性方差漂移和平方根扩散,对理论金融应用特别有意义,在所考虑的框架中排名靠前,优于几个非仿射模型。我们对波动率预测回归模型的分析表明,所评估的模型具有显著的预测准确性,证明了它们在预测未来波动趋势方面的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Empirical analysis of crude oil dynamics using affine vs. non-affine jump-diffusion models

This paper investigates the dynamics of the United States oil (USO) exchange traded fund (ETF). Daily USO returns are modelled using stochastic volatility (SV) frameworks derived from three different model classes: SV models with contemporaneous jumps in returns and volatility (SVCJ); SV model with jumps in returns only (SVJ); and a pure SV model class without jumps. Six affine and non-affine models are considered within each model class that depend on specification of the drift and the diffusion terms in the variance process, resulting in a total of 18 models that are estimated using particle Markov Chain Monte Carlo (PMCMC) approach. Model evaluation is conducted using the Deviance Information Criterion (DIC), Bayes factors, probability plots, and deviation measures to assess the discrepancy between the estimated volatility and key benchmarks, the crude oil ETF volatility index (OVX) and the realised volatility (RV). Our analysis indicates that models incorporating jumps, particularly the SVCJ-PLY-0.5 and SVCJ-PLY-1.0, more accurately capture USO dynamics than standard SV models. The SVCJ-PLY-0.5 model ranks highest based on DIC statistics and Bayes factors, and both models excel in aligning their estimated volatility with the OVX and RV benchmarks. Overall, the statistical criteria employed in our comparison favour models with jumps over the standard SV model class, suggesting that models incorporating jumps in both return and variance processes (SVCJ) are superior to those with jumps solely in the return process (SVJ). The affine models SVJ-LIN-0.5 and SVCJ-LIN-0.5 with linear variance drift and square root diffusion that are particularly interesting for theoretical finance applications are highly ranked among considered frameworks, outperforming several non-affine alternatives. Our analysis of the regression model for volatility forecasting reveals a significant predictive accuracy in the evaluated models, demonstrating their effectiveness in anticipating future volatility trends.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: The Journal of Empirical Finance is a financial economics journal whose aim is to publish high quality articles in empirical finance. Empirical finance is interpreted broadly to include any type of empirical work in financial economics, financial econometrics, and also theoretical work with clear empirical implications, even when there is no empirical analysis. The Journal welcomes articles in all fields of finance, such as asset pricing, corporate finance, financial econometrics, banking, international finance, microstructure, behavioural finance, etc. The Editorial Team is willing to take risks on innovative research, controversial papers, and unusual approaches. We are also particularly interested in work produced by young scholars. The composition of the editorial board reflects such goals.
期刊最新文献
High-frequency realized stochastic volatility model Jump tail risk exposure and the cross-section of stock returns Time-varying variance decomposition of macro-finance term structure models Technological shocks and stock market volatility over a century Is firm-level political risk priced in the corporate bond market?
×
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