MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3121666479 · doi:10.34989/tr-84

Yield Curve Modelling at the Bank of Canada

2021· article· en· W3121666479 sur OpenAlexaffabout
David Jamieson Bolder, David Stréliski

Notice bibliographique

RevueTechnical reports · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Établissements canadiensBank of Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésYield curveCouponEconometricsParametric modelParametric statisticsInterest rateModel selectionFunction (biology)Government debtSet (abstract data type)EconomicsComputer scienceDebtEstimationMathematical optimizationMathematicsFinanceStatistics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The primary objective of this paper is to produce a framework that could be used to construct a historical data base of zero-coupon and forward yield curves estimated from Government of Canada securities' prices. The secondary objective is to better understand the behaviour of a class of parametric yield curve models, specifically, the Nelson-Siegel and the Svensson methodologies. These models specify a functional form for the instantaneous forward interest rate, and the user must determine the function parameters that are consistent with market prices for government debt. The results of these models are compared with those of a yield curve model used by the Bank of Canada for the last 15 years. The Bank of Canada's existing model, based on an approach developed by Bell Canada, fits a so-called "par yield" curve to bond yields to maturity and subsequently extracts zero-coupon and "implied forward" rates. Given the pragmatic objectives of this research, the analysis focuses on the practical and deals with two key problems: the estimation problem (the choice of the best yield curve model and the optimization of its parameters); and the data problem (the selection of the appropriate set of market data). In the absence of a developed literature dealing with the practical side of parametric term structure estimation, this paper provides some guidance for those wishing to use parametric models under "real world" constraints. In the analysis of the estimation problem, the data filtering criteria are held constant (this is the "benchmark" case). Three separate models, two alternative specifications of the objective function, and two global search algorithms are examined. Each of these nine alternatives is summarized in terms of goodness of fit, speed of estimation, and robustness of the results. The best alternative is the Svensson model using a price-error-based, log-likelihood objective function and a global search algorithm that estimates subsets of parameters in stages. This estimation approach is used to consider the data problem. The authors look at a number of alternative data filtering settings, which include a more severe or "tight" setting and an examination of the use of bonds and/or treasury bills to model the short-end of the term structure. Once again, the goodness of fit, robustness, and speed of estimation are used to compare these different filtering possibilities. In the final analysis, it is decided that the benchmark filtering setting offers the most balanced approach to the selection of data for the estimation of the term structure. This work improves the understanding of this class of parametric models and will be used for the development of a historical data base of estimated term structures. In particular, a number of concerns about these models have been resolved by this analysis. For example, the authors believe that the log-likelihood specification of the objective function is an efficient approach to solving the estimation problem. In addition, the benchmark data filtering case performs well relative to other possible filtering scenarios. Indeed, this parametric class of models appears to be less sensitive to the data filtering than initially believed. However, some questions remain; specifically, the estimation algorithms could be improved. The authors are concerned that they do not consider enough of the domain of the objective function to determine the optimal set of starting parameters. Finally, although it was decided to employ the Svensson model, there are other functional forms that could be more stable or better describe the underlying data. These two remaining questions suggest that there are certainly more research issues to be explored in this area.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,396
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,086
Tête enseignante GPT0,221
Écart entre enseignants0,134 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations11
Publié2021
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTechnical reportsMême sujetMonetary Policy and Economic ImpactTravaux en français237 207