Abstract
Optimization of GARCH(1,1) processes by maximum likelihood has been documented to be numerically difficult and prone to error. In this paper, we show that this difficulty is related to a one dimensional manifold in the parameter space where the likelihood function is large and almost constant. This manifold is revealed by introducing other natural parameterizations for the process, namely other coordinates in the parameter space. In order to avoid spurious fits, we suggest to fix the volatility of the process by a moment estimate and to estimate the remaining parameters with a maximum likelihood procedure. Moreover, the convergence properties of the maximization algorithm are vastly improved by working with one of the new coordinates system. We also investigate the finite sample distribution of the estimated parameters computed with a maximum likelihood. The results indicate that the intercept parameter α0 is strongly biased, whereas the volatility and several of the new coordinates have small bias. The aggregation properties of GARCH(1,1), from 10 minutes to 3.5 days are investigated. The results indicate that the theoretical aggregation relations for this process are not consistent with the FX data. Finally, the process is optimized to deliver the best volatility forecast for the next month.
*
The author would like to thank Tim Bollerslev and Ramazan Gencay for their many suggestions, the members of the research group at Olsen & Associates for their comments, and Ralph Baenziger for the implementation of the optimization programs
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bera, A. K. and M. L. Higgins (1993), ‘ARCH Models: Properties, Estimation and Testing’, Journal of Economic Surveys, 7(4), 305–362.
Bollerslev, T. (1986), ‘Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity’, Journal of Econometrics, 31, 307–327.
Bollerslev, T., R. Y. Chou and K. F. Kroner (1992), ‘ARCH Modeling in Finance’, Journal of Econometrics, 52, 5–59.
Dacorogna, M. M., C. L. Gauvreau, U. A. Müller, R. B. Olsen and O. V. Pictet (1996), ‘Changing Time Scale for Short-term Forecasting in Financial Markets’, Journal of Forecasting, 15(3), 203–227.
Davidson, R. and J. G. MacKinnon (1993), Estimation and Inference in Econometrics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
Drost, F. and T. Nijman (1993), ‘Temporal Aggregation of GARCH Processes’, Econometrica, 61, 909–927.
Engle, R. F. (1982), ‘Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of U. K. Inflation’, Econometrica, 50, 987–1008.
Engle, R. F. and T. Bollerslev (1986), ‘Modelling the Persistence of Conditional Variances’, Econometric Reviews, 5, 1–50.
Phillips, P. and J. Y. Park (1988), ‘On the Formulation of Wald Tests of Nonlinear Restrictions’, Econometrica, 56(5), 1065–1083.
Press, W. H., S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling and B. P Flannery (1992), Numerical Recipes in C. The Art of Scientific Computing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zumbach, G. (2000). The Pitfalls in Fitting Garch(1,1) Processes. In: Dunis, C.L. (eds) Advances in Quantitative Asset Management. Studies in Computational Finance, vol 1. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4389-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4389-3_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-6974-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-4389-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive