1

An ARMA(p,q) model is given by

$ \qquad \qquad Y_t = c + \sum\limits_{i=1}^{p}\varphi_iY_{t-i}+\sum\limits_{i=1}^{q}\theta_i\varepsilon_{t-i} + \varepsilon$

with $\varepsilon_t \sim N(0,\sigma^2)$.

Let's say our model is simply an ARMA(1,1) model. The expected value for tomorrow's forecast then is

$\qquad \qquad E[Y_{t+1}] = E[c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1\varepsilon_t + \varepsilon_{t+1}]$

$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1\varepsilon_t + E[\varepsilon_{t+1}]$

$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1\varepsilon_t$

with $Y_t$ being our time series. Correct so far?

Now, a GARCH(p,q) model is given by

$\qquad \qquad X_t = \sigma_t\varepsilon_t$

$\qquad \qquad \sigma_t^2=\omega + \sum\limits_{i=1}^{q}\alpha_iX_{t-i}^2+\sum\limits_{i=1}^{p}\beta_i\sigma_{t-i}^2$

with $\varepsilon_t \sim N(0,\sigma^2)$ again and with $X_t$ being our time series here right?

Now my questions arise when looking at an ARMA(n,m)-GHARCH(p,q) model:

$\qquad \qquad Y_t = c + \sum\limits_{i=1}^{n}\varphi_iY_{t-i}+\sum\limits_{j=1}^{m}\theta_jX_{t-j}+X_t$.

I understand that $X_t$ ist the underlying time series of the garch model, but isn't that simply the time series we are looking at and trying to just fit to a GARCH-Model?

Next, when looking at tomorrow's expected value from the ARMA(1,1)-GARCH(1,1) model, it is

$\qquad \qquad E[Y_{t+1}] = ... = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1X_t + E[X_{t+1}]$

$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1X_t + E[\sigma_{t+1}\varepsilon_{t+1}]$

$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1X_t + E[\sigma_{t+1}]E[\varepsilon_{t+1}]$

$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1X_t + E[\sigma_{t+1}]*0$

$\qquad \qquad \qquad \qquad = c+\varphi_1Y_t+\theta_1X_t $

Aren't $X_t$ and $Y_t$ basically the same time series were we tried to apply these models to? And where is $\sigma^2$ now, I thought our goal was to use tomorrow's forecasted variance in our combined model.

Thanks in advance for reading and taking your time.

  • The link has helped me a lot, thanks! So basically for my data above the X_t is the "time series" of the variance and the Y_t the time series of the returns of financial data? – Billy Klein Jan 18 '21 at 14:09
  • Looking at your equations above, $X_t$ is the random part of $Y_t$, and $X_t$ is modelled by GARCH as you have specified above. – Richard Hardy Jan 18 '21 at 18:41
  • Thanks a lot, I think I understood the difference between ARMA and GARCH now, I was a little irritated because of the switched parameters $Y_t$ and $\varepsilon_t$. I understand both on their own now I guess, but I still don't get what the combination of them does, because that $\varepsilon$ from the ARMA-GARCH Model is for tomorrows forecast then $E[\varepsilon_{t+1}]=0$ because that follows from $\varepsilon = \sigma_tZ_t$ and $E[Z_t]=0$. I don't get how that $\varepsilon$ helps me with tomorrows forecast. – Billy Klein Jan 19 '21 at 00:46
  • Pay attention to what information we are allowed to use at which point. $\mathbb{E}t(\varepsilon{t+1})=0$ but $\mathbb{E}_t(Z_t)=Z_t$ (a concrete realization of $Z_t$). Here I used subscript $_t$ for the expectation operator to denote it is conditional on information available at time $t$ (and similarly with $t+1$). – Richard Hardy Jan 19 '21 at 08:49
  • I understand that at timestamp $t$ we have real realisations for every coefficient. But for $t+1$ I thought it is $E[\varepsilon_{t+1}] = E[\sigma_{t+1}*Z_{t+1}]$ and it is $Z_t \sim N(0,\sigma^2)$, so our $E[Z_{t+1}]$ becomes $0$ here. And here I don't understand how this helps me for the ARMA-GARCH model. – Billy Klein Jan 19 '21 at 10:28
  • I am kind of irritated, because for example for an MA(q) set we can calculate (for a given data set with given observations) the error terms $\varepsilon_t$ recursively like here. But in our GARCH(p,q) model the residulas $\varepsilon_t$ seem to be calculated by $\varepsilon_t = y_t - \mu$ and with $y_t$ I mean the return in period $t$ and with $\mu$ the mean of all returns. – Billy Klein Jan 19 '21 at 12:36
  • Sorry, it is a bit hard to follow. Do you have any issues with ARMA alone or GARCH alone? Both are models for an observed time series $Y_t$. ARMA models the conditional mean as time varying in a particular way. GARCH models the conditional variance as time varying in a particular way. When the cond. mean of $Y_t$ follows ARMA, the cond. variance of $Y_t$ can be constant, follow GARCH or whatever. When the cond. variance of $Y_t$ follows GARCH, the cond. mean of $Y_t$ can be constant, follow ARMA or whatever. Estimation of each model is another story. – Richard Hardy Jan 19 '21 at 16:41
  • I think I understood it now after doing more research and reading some of your posts. I will talk about financial data in the following, so basically returns it it what I try to model. So, when you direcly apply a GARCH model, we assume that the mean is constant, and that is why we see people calculating the residuals by $\varepsilon_t=r_t-\mu$ and with $r_t$ I mean the return. But for our ARMA-GARCH model we apply the ARMA model first to get residuals with a constant mean which we then feed into our GARCH model, correct? – Billy Klein Jan 20 '21 at 10:51
  • After that, we have our $\sigma_t^2$ which is basically a "new series" with an almost constant variance. From there, we can calculate our new residuals by $\hat{\varepsilon_t} = \sqrt{\sigma_t^2}Z_t$ with $Z_t$ being white noise. And for our ARMA-GARCH model we apply these new $\hat{\varepsilon_t}$ then? – Billy Klein Jan 20 '21 at 11:03
  • This is not how I tend to put it, but I cannot see a serious error in your line of thought. Perhaps you can continue thinking as you do without any negative consequences. – Richard Hardy Jan 20 '21 at 11:53
  • Thanks a lot! You seem to be an expert in this field. Do you personally recommend any other specific models for modeling financial data and forecasting? – Billy Klein Jan 20 '21 at 12:19
  • ARMA(1,0)-GARCH(1,1) is a decent benchmark for many cases. You could experiment with other modifications of GARCH, there are a number of them. If you have data on realized variances available, realized GARCH tends to be good for variance modelling. It depends on what exactly you will be using your model for. – Richard Hardy Jan 20 '21 at 12:34
  • I really appreciate your time and effort. I will work through the lecture you just posted! – Billy Klein Jan 20 '21 at 13:27
  • Thanks, I am glad if I can help. Just note that realized GARCH works only if you have additional data on (i.e. an additional time series of) realized variances. – Richard Hardy Jan 20 '21 at 15:50
  • Hey Richard, I still have a question about the AR-GARCH Model, I think there lies my mistake of thinking. We use AR / ARMA Models to model the conditional mean, and given $E[Y_{t+1}]$ we get the expected value for tomorrow's return. With a GARCH model alone we assume that the mean is constant, and here we model the conditional variance. We get a forecast of tomorrows variance. When using an AR-GARCH Model now, the expected Value of tomorrow's return doesn't change, but we have a new value for our variance. Is that correct? Because I always assumed we'd get a new value for the return aswell. – Billy Klein Jan 21 '21 at 13:31
  • Sorry, I am quite busy with teaching at my main job, so I am only commenting here (usually on the questions that I find interesting or easy) when I have time. Perhaps you should read the linked thread carefully one more time and ponder upon it. – Richard Hardy Jan 21 '21 at 13:34
  • I wrote the following above: When the cond. variance of $Y_t$ follows GARCH, the cond. mean of $Y_t$ can be constant, follow ARMA or whatever. GARCH just specifies how the cond. variance is modelled, it does not restrict the other aspects of the model such as the cond. mean equation. See the section ARMA-GARCH in this answer. – Richard Hardy Jan 21 '21 at 13:54
  • I think I understand this, but my question is about tomorrow's Expected Value. Let $Y_t=c+\phi Y_{t-1}+\varepsilon_t$ be the AR(1) model of a given times series, and $\hat{Y}t=c+\phi\hat{Y}{t-1}+\hat{\varepsilon}t$ be the AR(1)-GARCH(1,1) model for the same time series, with $\hat{\varepsilon}_t=\sigma_tZ_t$ and $\sigma_t^2=\omega+\alpha\hat{\varepsilon}{t-1}+\beta\sigma_{t-1}^2$.

    Is it correct, that $E[Y_{t+1}] = E[\hat{Y}{t+1}]$? Only the variance $\sigma{t+1}^2$ would be different here compared to a GARCH(1,1) model alone.

    – Billy Klein Jan 21 '21 at 14:16
  • Yes, that is correct. (You forgot to square epsilon in the cond. variance equation, but that is a minor thing.) – Richard Hardy Jan 21 '21 at 14:22
  • Thank you so much, now it all makes sense! Will continue my studies and hopefully learn more from you in the future :) – Billy Klein Jan 21 '21 at 14:46

1 Answers1

0

Consider a dependent variable $Y_t$ which is an original time series or a transformation (such as log-returns) thereof.

  • ARMA models its conditional mean as time varying in a particular way.
    When the cond. mean of $Y_t$ follows ARMA, the cond. variance of $Y_t$ can be constant, follow GARCH or whatever.
    (See this answer for details.)
  • GARCH models its conditional variance as time varying in a particular way.
    When the cond. variance of $Y_t$ follows GARCH, the cond. mean of $Y_t$ can be constant, follow ARMA or whatever.
    (See this answer for details.)

Consider a basic example of ARMA(1,1)-GARCH(1,1): \begin{aligned} y_t &= c+\varphi_1 y_{t-1}+\varepsilon_t+\theta_1\varepsilon_{t-1}, \\ \varepsilon_t &= \sigma_t z_t, \\ \sigma^2_t &= \omega+\alpha_1\varepsilon_{t-1}^2+\beta_1\sigma_{t-1}^2, \\ z_t &\sim i.i.d(0,1). \end{aligned} Given the estimated model, a one-step-ahead estimate/forecast of the conditional mean and variance of $Y_t$ are the following: \begin{aligned} \mathbb{E_t}(y_{t+1}) &= c+\hat\varphi_1 y_{t}+\hat\theta_1\hat\varepsilon_{t}, \\ \text{Var}_t(y_{t+1}) &= c+\hat\alpha_1\hat\varepsilon_{t}^2+\hat\beta_1\hat\sigma_{t}^2. \end{aligned}

Richard Hardy
  • 67,272