MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1762321683

Applications of Bayesian Econometrics to Financial Economics

2005· dissertation· en· W1762321683 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christoffer Bengtsson

Bibliographic record

VenueLund University Publications (Lund University) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsMarkov chain Monte CarloPortfolioEstimatorBayesian probabilityBayesian econometricsShrinkage estimatorEconomicsComputer scienceBayesian inferenceStatisticsFinanceMathematicsBayesian statisticsBias of an estimatorMinimum-variance unbiased estimator
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This PhD thesis consists of four separate papers. What these papers have in common is that Bayesian Econometrics, in combination with Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods, is applied to study various problems in financial economics. The first two papers are further related in that they both deal with portfolio selection and estimation risk, as are the last two papers in that they both deal with international aspects of extreme stock returns. The first paper, "The Impact of Estimation Error on Single-Period Portfolio Selection", examines the impact of estimation error on single-period portfolio selection. This is done under slightly more realistic assumptions than those made by Chopra and Ziemba (1993, Journal of Portfolio Management 19, 6-12) in frequently cited paper, but still using their basic approach and simulation methodology, in which simulated estimation error is added to what are assumed to be the true mean vector and covariance matrix of returns. To obtain estimation error sizes that are more consistent with those in actual estimates, a Bayesian approach based on MCMC methods is used. The paper also looks at what effects short selling constraint have on the impact of estimation error. The empirical results differ from those of Chopra and Ziemba (1993), suggesting that the effect of estimation error may have been overestimated in the past. Furthermore, when some short selling is allowed, the paper finds reason to question the traditional viewpoint that estimating the covariance matrix correctly is always less important than estimating the mean vector correctly. The second paper, "A Shrinkage Estimator of the Covariance Matrix for Improved Mean-Variance Optimization", proposes a shrinkage estimator of the covariance matrix of returns which shrinks the usual sample covariance matrix towards a K-factor principal component covariance matrix. In addition, the paper examines the gains from taking into account the uncertainty of the estimated covariance matrix when selecting portfolios. This is done through portfolio resampling based on the posterior distribution of the covariance matrix quantified with MCMC methods. In an empirical contest between estimators, where the objective is to pick portfolios with as low out-of-sample volatility as possible, the proposed estimator is found to perform better than all other competing estimators. In addition, it is found that the out-of-sample volatility can be reduced even further through portfolio resampling. The third paper, "Jump Spillover in International Equity Markets", co-authored with Hossein Asgharian, studies what is referred to as jump spillover effects between a number of international equity indices. In order to identify the latent historical jumps of each index, a univariate stochastic volatility jump-diffusion model is estimated on each index using a Bayesian approach based on MCMC methods. The paper looks at the simultaneous jump intensities of pairs of countries and the probabilities that jumps in large countries cause jumps or unusually large returns in other countries. In all cases, significant evidence of jump spillover is found. In addition, it is found that jump spillover seems to be particularly large and significant between countries that belong to the same regions and have similar industry structures, whereas, interestingly, the sample correlations between the countries have difficulties in capturing the jump spillover effects. The fourth paper, "International Jumps in Returns", examines, just as the previous paper, the international aspects of jumps in returns, but does so in an econometrically more formal manner. The paper proposes a multivariate stochastic volatility jump-diffusion model which is estimated on three groups of major North American, European, and Asian equity indices. The model assumes that returns are affected by both systemic (simultaneous across markets) and idiosyncratic (market specific) jumps. In all three cases, significant evidence of the existence of systemic jumps is found. In the North American markets (the United States and Canada), the majority of jumps are systemic, whereas in the European markets (the United Kingdom, Germany, and France) and the Asian markets (Japan and Hong Kong), the majority of jumps are idiosyncratic. In all cases, the mean sizes of systemic jumps are significantly negative, while the mean sizes of idiosyncratic jumps are not significantly different from zero. Surprisingly, the finding in all cases is that the correlation coefficients between the sizes of systemic jumps are relatively small and not significantly different from zero.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLund University Publications (Lund University)Same topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207