MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Regime-Switching Model of Long-Term Stock Returns

2001· article· en· W2293176873 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary R. Hardy

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Actuarial Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeteroscedasticityEconometricsLog-normal distributionEconomicsAutoregressive modelStock (firearms)Equity (law)MathematicsStatisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper I first define the regime-switching lognormal model. Monthly data from the Standard and Poor’s 500 and the Toronto Stock Exchange 300 indices are used to fit the model parameters, using maximum likelihood estimation. The fit of the regime-switching model to the data is compared with other common econometric models, including the generalized autoregressive conditionally heteroskedastic model. The distribution function of the regime-switching model is derived. Prices of European options using the regime-switching model are derived and implied volatilities explored. Finally, an example of the application of the model to maturity guarantees under equity-linked insurance is presented. Equations for quantile and conditional tail expectation (Tail-VaR) risk measures are derived, and a numerical example compares the regime-switching lognormal model results with those using the more traditional lognormal stock return model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations446
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Actuarial JournalSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207