EconBase
← All papers

On Testing Equal Conditional Predictive Ability Under Measurement Error

Yannick Hoga, Timo Dimitriadis

arXiv 21 Jun 2021 · Econometrics · publishedJournal of Business and Economic Statistics (2021) · 5 citations (OpenAlex)

arXiv:2106.11104 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Loss functions are widely used to compare several competing forecasts. However, forecast comparisons are often based on mismeasured proxy variables for the true target. We introduce the concept of exact robustness to measurement error for loss functions and fully characterize this class of loss functions as the Bregman class. For such exactly robust loss functions, forecast loss differences are on average unaffected by the use of proxy variables and, thus, inference on conditional predictive ability can be carried out as usual. Moreover, we show that more precise proxies give predictive ability tests higher power in discriminating between competing forecasts. Simulations illustrate the different behavior of exactly robust and non-robust loss functions. An empirical application to US GDP growth rates demonstrates that it is easier to discriminate between forecasts issued at different horizons if a better proxy for GDP growth is used.

Citation extraction

41
references
121
in-text mentions
46
distinct cited
0
self-citations
12,889
main-text words

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 59% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.

Most heavily cited references

The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.

ReferenceIntensityMentionsSectionsMain text
1Laurent S, Rombouts JV, Violante F (2013) On loss functions and ranking forecasting performances of multivariate volatility models1.000103100%
2Giacomini R, White H (2006) Tests of conditional predictive ability0.97112592%
3Gneiting T (2011) Making and evaluating point forecasts0.9416483%
4Patton AJ (2011) Volatility forecast comparison using imperfect volatility proxies0.874202100%
5Aruoba SB, Diebold FX, Nalewaik J, Schorfheide F, Song D (2016) Improving0.87462100%
6Diebold FX, Mariano RS (1995) Comparing predictive accuracy0.73732100%
7Hansen PR, Lunde A (2005) A forecast comparison of volatility models: Does anything beat a GARCH(1, 1)?0.73732100%
8Hiriart-Urrut JB, Lemaréchal C (2001) Fundamentals of Convex Analysis0.6443267%
9Andersen TG, Bollerslev T, Christoffersen PF, Diebold FX (2013) Financial risk measurement for financial risk management0.64422100%
10Bräuning F, Koopman SJ (2014) Forecasting macroeconomic variables using collapsed dynamic factor analysis0.64422100%

Showing the top 10 of 46 scored citations.

Cited by, within the corpus

arXiv econ.EM papers that cite this one, ranked by how heavily they lean on it.

Citing paperIntensityMentionsSections
1Equal Predictive Ability Tests Based on Panel Data with Applications to OECD and IMF Forecasts0.40511
2Measurability of functionals and of ideal point forecasts0.40511
3Efficient Sampling for Realized Variance Estimation in Time-Changed Diffusion Models0.40511
4Statistical Inference for Score Decompositions0.40511