Model‐free evaluation of directional predictability in foreign exchange markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We examine directional predictability in foreign exchange markets using a model‐free statistical evaluation procedure. Based on a sample of foreign exchange spot rates and futures prices in six major currencies, we document strong evidence that the directions of foreign exchange returns are predictable not only by the past history of foreign exchange returns, but also the past history of interest rate differentials, suggesting that the latter can be a useful predictor of the directions of future foreign exchange rates. This evidence becomes stronger when the direction of larger changes is considered. We further document that despite the weak conditional mean dynamics of foreign exchange returns, directional predictability can be explained by strong dependence derived from higher‐order conditional moments such as the volatility, skewness and kurtosis of past foreign exchange returns. Moreover, the conditional mean dynamics of interest rate differentials contributes significantly to directional predictability. We also examine the co‐movements between two foreign exchange rates, particularly the co‐movements of joint large changes. There exists strong evidence that the directions of joint changes are predictable using past foreign exchange returns and interest rate differentials. Furthermore, both individual currency returns and interest rate differentials are also useful in predicting the directions of joint changes. Several sources can explain this directional predictability of joint changes, including the level and volatility of underlying currency returns. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".