Lithuanian stock market analysis using a set of Garch models.
Teresiene, Deimante
1. Introduction
Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models
(GARCH) are quite popular all over the world. These models can be used
for stock, bond, indices, currency, derivative price volatility
modelling and forecasting. GARCH models were applied in various areas,
so the main point of the author is not to analyse the objects of the
research but to find which models are the most popular.
There is not much research which analyses GARCH models in
Lithuania. Girdzijauskas and Simutis (informatics) (2002), Danilenko
(mathematics) (2007) applied GARCH (1,1) model for financial markets.
Girdzijauskas and Simutis I2002) analysed S&P500 index's
volatility so there is only one work of Danilenko (2007), in which the
volatility of the OMXV index is modelled and forecasted. These
researches are not carried out by economists so the main point of the
articles is to present the main characteristics of the GARCH model and
not the ability of modelling and forecasting volatility. Such authors as
Leipus, Norvaisa (2004) and Klivecka (2007) analysed the GARCH models
from a mathematical background. So there is no research in which some
different GARCH type of models were applied to the Lithuanian stock
market. There is a lack of such researches and economic view.
The aim of the research is: after analyzing stock price volatility
factors and specifics of generalized autoregressive conditional
heteroskedasticity models as a tool of volatility modelling, to create a
classification system of stock price volatility factors and also
practically to apply a set of "GETIP" models to the Lithuanian
stock market. "GETIP" is an acronym for five GARCH type models
which are applied to the OMXV index and to all corporations from the
Main and Secondary lists. "GETIP" models are GARCH (1,1),
EGARCH (1,1), TARCH (1,1), IGARCH (1,1) and PARCH (1,1).
The tasks of the article are:
1. To inspect the reasons of stock return volatility.
2. To suggest a classification system of stock price volatility
factors.
3. To apply GARCH models to the Lithuanian stock market: OMXV index
and to all corporations from the Main and Secondary lists.
The object of the research is Lithuanian stock market (OMXV index
and all stocks of corporations from the Main and Secondary lists).
In this article statistical, mathematical and econometric methods
are used, i.e. correlation analysis, static and dynamic prognostication,
various unit root tests (ADF, PP), ARCH-LM--heteroskedasticity test,
autocorrelation, partial autocorrelation, ARMA (1,1), calculated
"LADSH" model suitability selection criterions, various
prognostication accuracy estimation parameters, applied set of general
autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models "GETIP",
descriptive statistics, regression analysis, time series. Thus,
qualitative and quantitative models are used. For applying the GARCH
models Eviews6 software was used.
GARCH models are widely applied for modelling the volatility of
various markets, but nobody tried to apply these models to the
Lithuanian stock market. In this work for the first time various GARCH
models are applied to the Lithuanian stock market and the best ones are
chosen for modelling and forecasting. The research is carried out using
not only the OMXV index but also all the corporations from the Main and
Secondary lists. Such a wide investigation of GARCH models allowed us to
find the most suitable GARCH model not only for the market as a whole,
but also for every company separately and for different sectors.
2. Factors of stock return volatility
Macroeconomic variables play a key role in asset pricing theories.
For this reason, many authors have empirically studied the link between
macroeconomic variables and stock market volatility. A number of studies
document that a relationship exists between macroeconomic variables and
equity market returns. The APT literature suggests that macroeconomic
variables may proxy for pervasive risk factors (Bilson et al. 2000: 30)
Both macroeconomists and finance specialists are increasing their
attention to the relationship between the stock market and the rest of
the economy. There can be little doubt about the growing importance of
the stock market from the point of view of the aggregate economy. It has
always been recognized that the stock market reflects to some extent the
goings-on in the rest of the economy, but recently there has been
widespread recognition that the influence is also in the opposite
direction--dramatic events in the stock market are likely to have an
impact upon the real economy (Black et al. 2001: 35).
Beber and Brandt (2007) in their article described a negative
relation between macroeconomic uncertainty and the reduction of open
interest after the news release. This result was consistent with market
participants closing out hedging positions and with the degree of
hedging activity depending on the degree of macroeconomic uncertainty to
be hedged.
Fama and Schwert (1977) found mixed results with respect to the
direction of causality between return volatility and the volatility of
macroeconomic and financial variables. They found that: (a) inflation
volatility predicts stock volatility and stock volatility does not
predict inflation volatility, (b) money growth volatility predicts stock
volatility and stock volatility predicts money growth volatility (c)
industrial production volatility weakly explains the volatility of stock
returns while stock volatility helps to predict industrial production
volatility. Overall, their results point to a positive linkage between
macroeconomic volatility and stock market volatility, with the direction
of causality being stronger from the stock market to the macroeconomic
variables.
Empirically, the evidence of linking macroeconomic factors to the
stock market is mixed at best. Chen, Roll, and Ross (1986) were among
the first to explore the link between macroeconomic variables and stock
prices, and using a multifactor model they found evidence that
macroeconomic factors are priced. Pearce and Roley (1985) also conclude
that stock prices respond to macroeconomic news.
Bordo and Wheelock (2006) found that many, but by no means all,
U.S. and British stock market crashes of the 19th and 20th centuries
were followed by recessions. A serious decline in economic activity was
more likely, they concluded, if a crash was accompanied or followed by a
banking panic.
2.1. Inflation's influence on stock market
The empirical relationship between inflation and common stocks was
first investigated by Jaffe and Mandelker (1976), Bodie (1976). Although
employing different empirical approaches, these authors all concluded
with a significant negative relationship between the proxies for
inflation and stock returns. Following these pioneer studies, Fama and
Schwert (1977) investigate the inflation effect on asset returns in a
number of assets. They conclude that, similar to previous studies,
common stocks seem to perform poorly as hedge against both expected and
unexpected inflation. Since these earlier studies, the empirical
literature on the Fisher Hypothesis has been prolific, and the findings
have been largely similar.
The relationship between stock returns and inflation has inspired
both theoretical and empirical studies. Most empirical research employed
exclusively the United States (US) data in the analysis. Some papers
extended the investigation to other country samples, but only a few
employed emerging markets data.
Stocks are a good hedge against inflation because, in theory, the
company's revenues and earnings should grow at the same rate as
inflation over time. Of course companies can react to inflation by
raising their prices, but others who compete in a global market may find
it difficult to stay competitive with foreign producers who do not have
to raise prices due to inflation. More importantly, inflation robs
investors (and everyone else) by raising prices with no corresponding
increase in value. People pay more for less. This means company's
finances are overstated by inflation because the numbers (revenues and
earnings) rise with the rate of inflation in addition to any added value generated by the company. When inflation declines, so do the inflated
earnings and revenues.
Inflation erodes purchasing power and retirees on fixed income.
That is why financial advisers caution even retirees to keep some
percentage of their assets in the stock market as a hedge against
inflation (Liitle 2008).
Canto and Kraussl's (2006) main results can be summarized as
follows: (i) there are clear short-term international dynamic
interactions among the European stock futures markets; (ii) foreign
economic news affects domestic returns; (iii) futures returns adjust to
news immediately; (iv) announcement timing of macroeconomic news
matters; (v) stock market dynamic interactions do not increase at the
time of the release of economic news; (vi) foreign investors react to
the content of the news itself more than to the response of the domestic
market to the national news; and (vii) contemporaneous correlation
between futures returns changes at the time of macroeconomic releases.
It is now taken as a stylized fact by market participants and
academicians alike that returns on stocks suffer significantly in the
face of high or rising inflation. This view contrasts starkly with the
state of conventional wisdom and economic theory less than three decades
ago, when an investment in equities was believed to be a relatively good
hedge against inflation. That earlier perception was challenged by the
drubbing equity investors took during the 1970s, and was refuted by
several studies that offered compelling statistical evidence of
inflation's negative effect on stock returns.
The other side of this coin, as some Wall Street investment
strategists see it, is that the recent-years' decline in
inflationary pressures and inflation expectations justifies the recent
outsized stock returns, as well as the high current valuations as gauged
by record-high price- earnings ratios or record-low dividend yields
(Sharpe 1999).
Elaborating on Fama's work, Geske and Roll (1983) propose
that, besides money demand, the money supply linkage may help explain
the phenomenon. The authors propose a chain of macroeconomic events that
leads to a "spurious" correlation between stock returns and
inflation. They suggest that stock prices' reaction in anticipation
of future economic activity (Fama's model) is highly correlated to
government revenue, so that the government faces a deficit when economic
output decreases. In order to balance the budget, the Treasury either
borrows or issues money through the central bank, causing inflation.
Thus, stock returns and inflation are negatively related due to a fiscal
and monetary linkage--the Reverse Causality Hypothesis. The authors find
some evidence in support of their framework, especially the signalling
from stock returns to changes in nominal interest rates and changes in
expected inflation.
Theoretically, inflation could be neutral with respect to stock
prices. In such inflation--indexed world, news of higher-than-expected
inflation is incorporated into the numerator (higher cash flows as the
price increases are passed through to the consumers) of equation 1, with
an offsetting adjustment in the denominator (higher discount rates to
compensate stockholders for losses in purchasing power).
[P.sub.t] = [[infinity].summation over ([tau]=1)]
E[[D.sub.t+[tau]]/[[OMEGA].sub.t]]/1 + [r.sub.t+[tau]]. (1)
In the first equation [P.sub.t] is the price of the stock at time
t, E [*/[[OMEGA].sub.t]] denotes the mathematical expectation
conditional on information available at time t, [D.sub.t+[tau]] is the
dividend paid at time t + r, and [r.sub.t+[tau]] is the stochastic risk-adjusted discount factor for cash flows that occur at time t + r
(Funke, Matsuda 2002). Economic announcements influence stock price
movements if the new information affects either expectations of future
dividends, or discount rates, or both. The new information is
represented by the difference in the announced value of inflation at
time t + 1 and the expected value as of time t.
The historical influence of inflation on stock prices is mysterious
because stocks are claims to the profits generated by the corporate
capital stock, and thus they are real assets that should not be directly
vulnerable to inflation (Maghayereh 2002). It is obvious that when
inflation increases the P/E ratio decreases and vice versa. Stock prices
are undervalued when inflation is high, and can become overvalued when
inflation drops. When examining the links between the U.S. economy and
the stock market, many investment professionals rely on what is known as
the "Fed model". The model assumes that bonds and equities
compete for space in investment portfolios; if bond yields increase,
then stock yields must also rise in order to remain competitive (Li, Hu
1998).
Historically, the rate of inflation has been a major influence on
nominal bond yields. Therefore, the Fed model implies that stock yields
and inflation must be highly correlated.
Christiansen and Ranaldo (2005) wrote that for bonds, the relevance
of inflation and risk premium varies across the time. In the present
value model, inflation (real interest rate) changes make bond and stock
returns move in opposite (same) directions. Changes in risk premium and
term premium typically affect bonds and stocks differently. Although the
bond-stock return correlation is generally positive, the relation might
be negative in periods of "flight to quality". Li, Hu (1998)
shows that real interest rates drive the bond and stock comovements and
that inflation shocks make bond and stock returns move in opposite
directions. Other drivers that decrease the bond-stock correlation are
dividends and risk premium. Moreover, he finds that the bond-stock
correlation mainly depends on inflation uncertainty.
Inflation or the central bank's response to inflation damages
the real economy and, by extension, the profitability of corporations.
Inflation also might make investors more risk-averse, thus driving up
the risk premium.
Modigliani and Cohn (1979) contend that stock investors and not
their bond counterparts are subject to "inflation illusion";
that is, they fail to understand the impact of inflation on nominal
dividend growth rates and extrapolate historical nominal growth rates
even in periods of changing inflation. From a rational investor's
viewpoint, then, stock prices are undervalued when inflation is high,
and can become overvalued when inflation drops.
2.2. Interest rates and stock market
The tool for inflation reduction of Central bank is short-term
interest rates. By making money more expensive to borrow, the Central
bank effectively removes some of the excess capital from the market. So
it is essential to analyse the influence of interest rates on stock
market.
The unexpected increase in inflation generates temporary variations
in real and nominal interest rates. The real interest rate on loans,
which affects investment decisions through the real cost of borrowing to
firms, increases temporarily, generating a drop in the growth rate of
investment (Dos Santos, Zezza 2004).
High energy prices, rising unit labour costs and pressure on
supplies of key resources such as steel and cement guarantee that the
Central bank will continue raising short-term interest rates. High
interest rates and companies raising prices do not add up to an
investment profile most investors enjoy.
When the next Central bank meeting is expected to bring interest
rate cuts or increases, it is wise, as for a stock investor, to be aware
of the potential effects behind such decisions. Although the
relationship between interest rates and the stock market is fairly
indirect, the two tend to move in opposite directions.
Stock valuations and interest rates are directly linked. Businesses
and the stock market pay close attention to what the Central bank
decides because interest rates are so important. There are obviously
some very practical concerns about interest rates, such as the cost of
borrowing, the effect on consumer spending and so on. There is also a
fundamental consideration that this is the basis for beginning any
process that leads to the valuation of a stock.
A decrease in interest rates means that those people who want to
borrow enjoy an interest rate cut. But this also means that those who
are lending money, or buying securities such as bonds, have a decreased
opportunity to make income from interest. If we assume investors are
rational, a decrease in interest rates prompts investors to move money
away from the bond market to the equity market (Walti 2005). At the same
time, businesses enjoy the ability to finance expansion at a cheaper
rate, thereby increasing their future earnings potential, which, in
turn, leads to higher stock prices. Investors and economists alike
therefore view lower interest rates as catalysts for expansion.
Overall, the unifying effect of an interest rate cut is the
psychological effect it has on investors and consumers; they see it as
the benefit to personal and corporate borrowing, which in turn leads to
greater profits and an expanding economy.
A rise in bond yields (as a result of monetary policy measures or
alterations in inflation expectations), for example, will trigger a move
out of stocks, as a result of which share prices and P/E ratios fall and
the earnings yield rises in parallel to the bond yield (Bulthaupt,
Hofmann 2004).
A rise under the interest rates affects the valuation of the
stocks. The rise in the interest rates raises the expectations of the
market participants, which demand better returns commensurate with the
increased returns on bonds. The above relationship of market P/E and
10-year bond Yield of the US treasury gives a very good understanding
of, how over the long-term the stock markets are impacted by the change
in interest rates.
Moreover, under a low interest rate regime, corporates are able to
increase profitability by reducing their interest expenses. However,
under a rising interest rate regime since interest expenses rise,
profitability is hit. Besides that, when one calculates the inherent
value of a company by the cash flow discounting model, there is a
twofold impact. First, there is a reduction in the cash flows due to
lower profitability, second, there is a higher discounting rate due to
higher interest rate regime. This leads to a relatively lower intrinsic
value of the company.
Due to these reasons there may be a change in asset allocation among equities and debt. Investors, who are averse to risk, tend to move
funds from one asset class to another. When interest rates rise,
investors move from equities to bonds and vice versa. Having said that
it does not mean that all the funds move from one asset class to
another, but it happens that the marginal shift of funds does change
valuations to some extent (Kim et al. 2005). Whereas interest rates
drop, returns on bonds drop while the returns on equities tend to look
relatively more attractive and the migration of fund from bonds to
equities takes place, increasing the prices of equities.
Samitas and Kenourgios (2005) in their findings noticed that
generally domestic industrial production was more prominent than
domestic interest rates, while US interest rates were more prominent
than US industrial production. Furthermore, a number of short run causal
relationships were also found giving different implications for policy
makers interested in the long run and short run contagion. The main
findings strongly suggest that the emerging CE European capital markets
are macroeconomically co-integrated with a German economic influence,
but less or not influenced by the American global factor.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
Viale (2006) wrote that the well-documented nonlinear relation
between macroeconomic news and stock market returns depends on the
quality of the information disclosed by what a priori investors believe
to be vague news, i.e., ambiguous and noisy announcements.
2.3. Three-dimensional system of stock volatility factors
Factors of stock price volatility are analysed by various authors.
Usually, in the literature not classified different factors in various
situations are mentioned. According to the author, for the stock price
volatility factors analysis a principal of "percolator" can be
applied. The "percolator" principal can be explained as a
classification system when all stock price volatility factors are
divided into three levels, which are inside, outside factors and
investors' psychology as the main factor in all the system. The
author of this work thinks that investors sift all the information that
they have and choose the main moments according to their psychological
state, and after that they take an investment decision. So, in such a
way they form supply and demand and also stock price volatility.
The explanation of stock return volatility is quite a difficult
process. There is not any special formula for exact return
determination. After analysing various factors of stock price volatility
(according to information flows) they can be divided into inside and
outside factors. All information from corporations' data sources
can be assigned to the inside factors and all information, which
influences stock price from corporations to the market, can be assigned
to outside factors. As an additional group of factors that influence
stock price can be investor's psychology. The author has noticed
that there is no research about all three groups of factors together.
Usually, inside and outside factors are analysed without investor's
psychology and investor's psychology is analysed separately. The
main idea of this three-dimensional system is shown in Fig. 1.
3. Understanding volatility
When we talk about asset pricing we usually use the term
'volatility'. Volatility is described as a parameter of
stochastic processes that are used to model variations in financial
asset prices. Two kinds of volatility can be found in the literature:
implied volatility and statistical volatility (Table 1). Both of them
normally refer to the same process volatility, but volatility estimates
often turn out to be quite different and because volatility can only be
measured in the context of a model, it is very difficult to assess the
accuracy of estimates and forecasts (Alexander 2005).
Volatility models can be divided into two groups: constant and
time-varying volatility models.
Constant volatility models only refer to the unconditional
volatility of a return process. These models have a finite constant a,
the same throughout the whole data generation process. Time-varying
volatility models describe a process for the conditional volatility. The
conditional distribution is a distribution that governs a return at a
particular instant in time and the conditional volatility at time t is
the square root of the variance of the conditional distribution at time
t.
The majority of time-varying volatility models assume that returns
are normally distributed, in which case each conditional distribution is
completely determined by its conditional mean and its conditional
variance. The conditional mean and variance could change at every time
period throughout the process, but for the purposes of estimating and
forecasting conditional volatility it is often assumed that the
conditional mean is a constant. (Alexander 2005).
Volatility over sufficiently long periods of time reverts back to a
constant mean. However, volatility may depart from this mean for
extended periods of time. This process is called "volatility
clustering". Volatility clustering is one of the most important
"stylized facts" in financial time series data. Whereas price
changes themselves appear to be unpredictable, the magnitude of those
changes. As measured, e.g. by the absolute or squared returns, it
appears to be predictable in the sense that large changes tend to be
followed by large changes--of either sign--and small changes tend to be
followed by small changes (McQueen, Vorkink 2004).
Asset price fluctuations are thus characterized by episodes of low
volatility, with small price changes, irregularly interchanged by
episodes of high volatility, with large price changes. This phenomenon
was first observed by Mandelbrot (1963) in commodity prices. Since the
pioneering papers by Engle (1982) and Bollerslev (1986) on
autoregressive conditional heteroskedastic (ARCH) models and their
generalization to GARCH models, volatility clustering has been shown to
be present in a wide variety of financial assets including stocks,
market indices, exchange rates and interest rate securities.
Stylized facts about volatility clustering include the following:
* both good news (positive shocks) and bad news lead to higher
levels of volatility;
* bad news tends to increase future volatility more than good news;
* the effect of news on volatility has a transitory (rapid decay)
and more permanent (slow decay) component;
* volatility appears to have an effect on the risk premium.
(McQueen, Vorkink 2004).
Volatility is a very important parameter in financial risk
management. Daily volatility can be calculated using such a formula:
[[sigma].sub.daily] = [square root of [T.summation over
(t=1)][([X.sub.t] - [bar.X]).sup.2]/T - 1, (2)
where [X.sub.t] = 100ln [Y.sub.t]/[Y.sub.t-1], t = 1, 2,..., T. and
[bar.X] = [T.summation over (t=1)[X.sub.t]/T, (3)
[[sigma].sub.period] = [[sigma].sub.daily] x [square root
[[tau].sub.period]]. (4)
4. GARCH models as volatility valuation measure
General autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models
(GARCH) today are the most widely used models for risk management in
finance. The autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) models
were introduced by Engle in 1982 and their generalization, the so-called
GARCH models by Bollerslev in 1986. It has been the most commonly
employed class of time series models in the recent finance literature.
These models have been very successful in describing the behavior of
financial return data. Their appeal comes from the fact that they can
capture both volatility clustering and unconditional return
distributions with heavy tails--two stylized facts associated with
financial return data.
GARCH models can be applied for stock and index trading, risk
management, portfolio management and asset allocation, option valuation,
etc. Analysing time series it is often used for volatility clustering.
The author accomplished comprehensive research of generalized
autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models' appliance to
the Lithuanian stock market. Five heteroskedasticity models were applied
to the national market: GARCH (1,1), EGARCH (1,1), TARCH (1,1), IGARCH
(1,1), PARCH (1,1) from which the best models are selected for each
company from the Main and Secondary lists and for OMXV index. Also
checked in this work is the exponential autoregressive conditional
heteroskedasticity model, which was most suitable for the OMXV index,
ability to forecast for short and long periods. The results of the
research will help financial analysts and investors to properly value
Lithuania's stock market tendencies and replenish a set of market
analysis tools in Lithuania's conditions. The estimation of the
GARCH model involves the joint estimation of a mean and a conditional
variance equation (Lildholdt 2002).
In the standard GARCH (1,1) specification:
[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t] = [omega] + [alpha][[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-1]
+ [beta][[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-1], (5)
[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t] is the one-period ahead forecast variance
based on past information, it is called the conditional variance. The
conditional variance equation specified in formula (5) is a function of
three terms:
* The mean: [omega].
* News about volatility from the previous period, measured as the
lag of the squared residual from the mean equation:
[[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-1] (the ARCH term).
* Last period's forecast variance: [[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-1]
(the GARCH term).
Nelson (1991) created the model which values the leverage effect
and called such a model exponential GARCH (EGARCH). Nelson argued that
the non negativity constraints in the linear GARCH model were too
restrictive. The GARCH model imposes the non-negative constraints on the
parameters [[alpha].sub.i] and [[gamma].sub.j], while there are no
restrictions on these parameters in the EGARCH model. In the EGARCH
model, the conditional variance, [[sigma].sub.t] is an asymmetric
function of lagged disturbances [u.sub.t-i]:
log ([[sigma].sup.2.sub.t]) = [[alpha].sub.0] + [[alpha].sub.1]
[absolute value of [u.sub.t-1]]/[[alpha].sub.t-1]] + [[beta].sub.1] log
([[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-1]) + [gamma][u.sub.t-1]/[[sigma].sub.t-1]. (6)
The other model which analyses the leverage effect of new
information on stock volatility is TARCH. This model was analysed by
such authors as Zakoian (1994) and Glosten et al. (1993). This model can
be explained as follows:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (7)
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (8)
In this model "good news" [u.sub.t-i] > 0 and
"bad news" ut_i < 0, have different influence on
conditional variance. When [[gamma].sub.k] = 0 for all k, then the TARCH
model is adequate for the GARCH model. The difference between TARCH and
EGARCH is that in the first model leverage effect has expression of
quadratic and in the other one--exponential. In TARCH and EGARCH models
persistence of volatility is very long.
When [alpha] + [beta] = 1 and [beta] = [lambda], the main GARCH
expression can be rewritten as follows:
[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t] = [omega] + (1 - [lambda])
[[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-1] + [lambda][[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-1], 0 [less
than or equal to] [lambda] [less than or equal to] 1. (9)
There is no defined non-conditional variance and time forecasts do
not converge in this model. So, in this situation the process of
variance is not stationary, therefore
such a model is called integrated GARCH (IGARCH).
Most GARCH models analyse conditional variance. Analysing
volatility researches often have a mean standard deviation. But some
researches offered GARCH model which uses standard deviation. Such class
of models was defined by Ding, Granger (1996) and this idea was named
power ARCH model (PARCH). This model can be expressed in such a way:
[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], (10)
where [sigma] > 0, [absolute value of [[lambda].sub.i]] [less
than or equal to] 1, when i = 1, 2,..., r and [[lambda].sub.i] = 0, when
i > r and r [less than or equal to] p. PARCH model when [gamma] [not
equal to] 0 has a leverage effect. PARCH model can be explained as GARCH
when [sigma] = 2 and [[gamma].sub.i] = 0 for every i.
When two or more models are taken for analysis which have the same
number of the parameters, then for suitability selection log likehood
function can be used. But when the models have a different number of
parameters, Akaike information criterion is used. If the number of model
parameters is signed P, then AIC can be expressed as follows:
AIC (P) = 2 ln(maximum likelihood) - 2P. (11)
5. The practice of a set of ,,GETIP" models in the Lithuanian
stock market
"GETIP" is an acronym of five GARCH type models which are
applied to OMXV index and to all corporations from the Main and
Secondary lists. "GETIP" models are GARCH (1,1), EGARCH (1,1),
TARCH (1,1), IGARCH (1,1) and PARCH (1,1). The period for analysis is
from 2000-01-01 till 2008-01-18. All the results of the research are
shown in Table 2. Estimated "GETIP" models' coefficients:
* GARCH
[[sigma].sup.2] = 1.59 E - 05 + 0.156801[[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-1] +
0.606602[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-1].
* EGARCH
log ([[sigma].sup.2.sub.t]) = -0.169412 + 0.987085 log
[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-j] + 0.068175 [absolute value of
[[epsilon].sub.t-i]/[[sigma].sub.t-1]] - 0.002287
[[epsilon].sub.t-k]/[[sigma].sub.t-k].
* TARCH
[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t] = 1.46 E - 05 +
0.619615[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-j] + 0.120691[[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-1] -
0.083507[[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-k][I.sub.t-k].
* IGARCH
[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t] = 0.975629[[sigma].sup.2.sub.t-j] +
0.024371[[epsilon].sup.2.sub.t-i].
* PARCH
[[sigma].sup.1.sub.t] = 9.79E - 05 +
0.964464[[sigma].sup.1.sub.t-j] + 0.035655 [([[epsilon].sub.t-i]] -
0.053604[[epsilon].sub.t-i]).sup.1].
According to the author the models can be ranged as follows:
1. EGARCH
2. PARCH
3. TGARCH
4. GARCH
5. IGARCH
A set of GARCH models was applied to all sectors classified by
GICS. The results of suitability of different GARCH models for separate
sectors are shown in Figures 2-5.
For those investors who use general autoregressive conditional
heteroskedasticity models the author of this article offers to use
different models for separate sectors:
* OMXV index--EGARCH;
* Health Care--PARCH;
* Energy--TARCH;
* Materials--LFO--EGARCH; GRG--GARCH;
* Industrials--EGARCH;
* Consumer Discretionary--VBL, KBL--PARCH, SNG, APG--TARCH, UTR,
LNS--GARCH;
* Consumer Staples--EGARCH;
* Financial--TARCH;
* Telecommunication Services--PARCH;
* Utilities--EGARCH.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
The best GARCH model for the Lithuanian stock market is EGARCH (for
OMXV index and most sectors), so it is important to analyse the ability
to forecast by this model. In Table 3 the relationship between forecast
measures and time horizon is placed using exponential GARCH model.
After analysing EGARCH model's abilities to forecast in
different periods, the conclusion can be drawn that there is not any
tendency for which time horizon this model forecast is the best (Fig.
6). At a first glance it can appear that in short time (5, 10 days)
EGARCH model forecasts better than in long period, but the correlation
coefficient is only 0.24 which is not significant. After doing the
research, the conclusions can be made that for the Lithuanian stock
market the most suitable model is EGARCH. This model has a strong
leverage effect which means that bad news has more effect on stock price
volatility than good news. Thus, according to such an idea all investors
tend to remember bad events longer than good information. Therefore,
according to the author when bad information appears in the stock market
it is quite difficult to value the flows of positive information.
[FIGURE 6 OMITTED]
6. Conclusions
1. Analysing generalized autoregressive conditional
heteroskedasticity models the author excludes the three main
characteristics. That is, the principal of heteroskedasticity,
volatility clusterization (including excess, asymmetry and Jarque-Bera
test) and also leverage effect. The origin of the heteroskedasticity
idea in finance gave bigger opportunities for investors in forecasting
stock price volatility. In homoskedastic processes when the variance is
determined and static, such a way is not suitable because the results of
research would be wrong. For more accurate return forecasts volatility
clusterization should be estimated. Analysing stock price dynamics
volatility clusters can usually be noticed, which periodically repeats.
According to the author there is a direct dependence between information
flows and volatility clusters. It is important to underline that the
influence of information on stock price volatility depends on its type
(bad or good news) though clusters form in both situations. The other
essential characteristics of heteroskedasticity models is a leverage
effect when bad news has bigger impact on stock price than good news.
2. After the investigation of various GARCH models, all of them can
be classified into univariate and multivariate models. Because of the
big variety of GARCH models, a problem of suitable model selection
appears. For this purpose it is essential to use model selection
criterions which help to value the level of model suitability. There are
various types of model selection criterions but not all of them are
suitable for different situations, others are very similar and give the
same results. According to the author's empirical researches the
best results were achieved using Akaike in formation criterion. Using
"LADSH"--a set of model selection criterions the author
noticed that only in some situations the results of range were
different.
3. The research of the Lithuanian stock market showed that the
market is stationary and the data is not distributed normally. GARCH
type of models can be applied to the Lithuanian stock market because for
analysed returns homoskedasticity is not suitable. After using a set
"GETIP" of GARCH models, the author noticed that the most
suitable model for OMXV index is EGARCH. From the research results the
conclusion can be drawn that there is a leverage effect in the
Lithuanian stock market. So this means that investors react more to bad
news than to good news. In this way the situation of nowadays in stock
market can be explained. Moreover, bad news from USA and Europe dwarfed
good news about separate corporation financial data. According to model
selection results the hypothesis can be rejected that the best model for
the Lithuanian security market is GARCH (1,1).
4. After the application of GETIP- a set of GARCH models, to all
sectors of the Lithuanian stock market some tendencies can be excluded.
Exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity
model (EGARCH) is the most suitable for industrials, consumer staples,
information technology and utilities sectors. TARCH is the best for the
energy and finance sectors. A power generalized autoregressive
conditional heteroskedasticity model (PARCH) is best reflected in health
care and telecommunication services sectors. Consumer discretionary
sector did not distinguish any tendencies because three models PARCH,
GARCH and TARCH gave the same results. According to the author it is
quite difficult to forecast the volatility of this sector and herewith there is a risk to invest in it. For the materials sector the most
suitable are GARCH(GRG) and EGARCH(LFO) models.
5. The researches of volatility forecasting using EGARCH model
should be used for static forecast method because of more accurate
prognosis. Analysing various statistical methods of forecasting accuracy
it has been noticed that there is not a significant relationship between
EGARCH model accuracy and the period of forecast. The correlation
coefficient between the mentioned parameters is 0.237781 which rejects
the strong dependence.
DOI: 10.3846/1611-1699.2009.10.349-360
Received 19 September 2008; accepted 28 August 2009
References
Alexander, C. 2005. Market Models: A Guide to Financial Data
Analysis. England. 400 p.
Beber, A.; Brandt, M. W. 2007. Resolving Macroeconomic Uncertainty
in Stock and Bond Markets. University of Lausanne.
Bilson, Ch.; Brailsford, T.; Hooper, V. 2000. Selecting
Macroeconomic Variables as Explanatory Factors of Emerging Stock Market
Returns. Department of Commerce Australian National University.
Canberra, Australia.
Black, A.; Fraser, P.; Groenevold, N. 2001. US Stock Prices and
Macroeconomic Fundamentals. Aberdeen Papers in Accountancy, Finance
& Management. Working Paper No. 01-3.
Bodie, Z. 1976. Common stocks as a hedge against inflation, Journal
of Finance 31: 459-470. doi:10.2307/2326617
Bollerslev, T. 1986. Generalised autoregressive conditional
heteroskedasticity, Journal of Econometrics 31: 307-27.
doi:10.1016/0304-4076(86)90063-1
Bordo, M. D.; Wheelock, D. C. 2006. When Do Stock Market Booms
Occur? The Macroeconomic and Policy Environments of 20th Century Booms.
Federal reserve bank of St. Louis.
Bulthaupt, F.; Hofmann, Th. 2004. A macroeconomic stock market
model, Journal of Economy & Markets: 1: 24-32.
Canto, B.; Kraussl, R. 2006. Stock Market Interactions and the
Impact of Macroeconomic News--Evidence from High Frequency Data of
European Futures Markets. Free University of Amsterdam and Center for
Financial Studies. Frankfurt.
Chen, F.; Roll, R.; Ross, S. 1986. Economic forces and the stock
market, Journal of Business 59(3): 383-403. doi:10.1086/296344
Christiansen, Ch.; Ranaldo, A. 2005. Realized Bond-Stock
Correlation: Macroeconomic Announcement Effects. Finance Research Group.
Aarhus School of Business.
Danilenko, S. 2007. Mathematical models appliance to stock market
analysis, Lithuanian Mathematical Journal 47: 442-447.
Ding, Z.; Granger, C. 1996. Modeling volatility persistence of
speculative returns: A new approach, Journal of Econometrics 73(1):
185-215. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(95)01737-2
Dos Santos, C.H.; Zezza, Z. 2004. A Post-Keynesian Stockflow
Consistent Macroeconomic Growth Model: Preliminary Results. The Levy
Economics Institute.
Engle, R. F. 1982. Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity
with estimates of the variance of UK inflation, Econometrica 50:
987-1007. doi:10.2307/1912773
Fama, E. F.; Schwert, G. W. 1977. Asset returns and inflation,
Journal of Financial Economics 5: 115-146.
doi:10.1016/0304-405X(77)90014-9
Funke, N.; Matsuda, A. 2002. Macroeconomic News and Stock Returns
in the United States and Germany. IMF Working Paper.
Geske, R.; Roll, R. 1983. The fiscal and monetary linkage between
stock returns and inflation, Journal of Finance 38: 1-33.
doi:10.2307/2327635
Girdzijauskas, S.; Simutis, R. 2002. Stock market indexes
forecasting possibilities using GARCH (1,1) model, in Conference Papers
in Informatics. Kaunas: Technologija, 326-330.
Glosten, L. R.; Jagannathan, R.; Runkle, D. E. 1993. On the
relation between the expected value and the volatility of the nominal
excess returns on stocks, Journal of Finance 48(5): 1779-1791.
doi:10.2307/2329067
Jaffe, J. F.; Mandelker, G. 1976. The "Fisher Effect" for
risky assets: an empirical investigation, Journal of Finance 31(2):
447-458. doi:10.2307/2326616
Kim, S. J.; McKenzie, M. D.; Faff, R. W. 2004. Macroeco nomic news
announcements and the role of expectations: evidence for US bond, stock
and foreign exchange markets, Journal of Multinational Financial
Management 14(4): 217-232. doi:10.1016/j.mulfin.2003.02.001
Klivecka, A. 2007. GARCH (1,1) process can have arbitrarily heavy
power tails, Lithuanian Mathematical Journal 47(2): 196-210.
Leipus, R.; Norvaisa, R. 2004. Financial markets theories
appliance, Money Studies 1: 31-53.
Li, L.; Hu, Z. F. 1998. Responses of the Stock Market to
Macroeconomic Announcements Across Economic States. IMF Working Paper.
IMF Institute.
Liitle, K. 2008. What Stock Investors Should Know About Inflation.
Available from Internet: <http://stocks.about.com/
od/marketnews/a/Inflat101105.htm>.
Lildholdt, P. M. 2002. Estimation of GARCH Models Based on open,
close, high, and low Prices, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of
Business.
Maghayereh, A. 2002. Causal Relations Among Stock Prices and
Macroeconomic Variables in the small, open Economy of Jordan. The
Hashemite University, Jordan.
Mandelbrot, B. 1963. The variation of certain speculative prices,
Journal of Business 36: 394-419. doi:10.1086/294632 Mcqueen, Grant;
Vorkink, Keith. 2004. Whence GARCH?
A Preference-Based Explanation for Conditional Volatility, Brigham
Young university.
Modigliani Franco; Richard A. Cohn. 1979. Inflation, rational
valuation and the market, Financial Analysts Journal 35(2): 24-44.
doi:10.2469/faj.v35.n2.24
Nelson, D. B. 1991. Conditional heteroscedasticity in asset
returns: a new approach, Econometrica 55: 703-708.
Pearce, D. K.; Roley, V. V. 1985. Stock prices and economic news,
Journal of Business 58(1): 49-69. doi:10.1086/296282
Samitas, A. G.; Kenourgios, D. F. 2005. Macroeconomic factors'
influence on "new" European countries stock returns: the case
of four transition economies, International Journal of Financial
Services Management 2(1): 4-20.
Sharpe, S. A. 1999. Stock Prices, Expected Returns, and Inflation.
Division of Research and Statistics. Federal Reserve Board. Washington.
Viale, A. M. 2006. Testing Overreaction and Underreaction to
Macroeconomic News: The Role of Noisy and Ambiguous Signals in the Stock
Market. Texas A & M University,
College Station. 42 p.
Walti, S. 2005. The Macroeconomic Determinants of Stock Market
Synchronization. Dublin: Trinity College.
Zakoian, J.-M. 1994. Threshold heteroskedastic models, Journal of
Economic Dynamics and Control 18: 931-955.
doi:10.1016/0165-1889(94)90039-6
Deimante Teresiene
Vilnius University Kaunas Faculty of Humanities,
Muitines g. 8, 44280 Kaunas, Lithuania
E-mail: deimante.teresiene@vukhf.lt
Table 1. Comparison of implied and statistical volatility
Implied Statistical
Definition The volatility forecast The volatility
over the life of an estimate (or
option that equates forecast) that is
an observed market obtained using a
price with the model statistical model
price of of the real world
an option. distribution of asset
returns.
Data Risk neutral option Historical time
prices and investor series on underlying
expectations. asset prices.
Model Option pricing model Moving averages,
(Black-Scholes) GARCH.
Source: (Alexander 2005)
Table 2. Suitability of "GETIP" models for OMXV index
GARCH EGARCH TGARCH
[alpha] 0.156801 0.068175 0.120691
[beta] 0.606602 0.987085 0.619615
[omega] 1.59E-05 -0.169412 1.46E-05
[gamma] -0.002287 0.083507
LL 7938.516 7954.939 7942.262
AIC -6.922788 -6.936247 -6.92518
Durbin-Watson stat 1.804854 1.808738 1.808568
Schwarz criterion -6.910273 -6.921228 -6.91016
Hannan-Quinn criterion -6.918225 -6.930770 -6.91970
Suitability according to AIC 4 1 3
IGARCH PARCH
[alpha] 0.024371 0.035655
[beta] 0.975629 0.964464
[omega] 9.79E-05
[gamma] 0.053604
LL 7911.981 7954.289
AIC -6.901380 -6.935679
Durbin-Watson stat 1.811963 1.808517
Schwarz criterion -6.893870 -6.920661
Hannan-Quinn criterion -6.898641 -6.930203
Suitability according to AIC 5 2
Table 3. A relationship between forecast measures and time horizon
5 10 20 40 50
RMSE 0.003929 0.004051 0.005551 0.006659 0.010110
MAE 0.003271 0.003539 0.004621 0.005287 0.007317
MAPE 54.69204 101.9385 113.0571 108.6843 105.4331
TIC 0.467739 0.559675 0.688790 0.780713 0.861805
BP 0.492965 0.007013 0.001774 0.028096 0.032032
VP 0.479679 0.947198 0.930804 0.886159 0.895631
CP 0.027356 0.045789 0.067422 0.085745 0.072336
100 150 200 255
RMSE 0.008294 0.008380 0.008541 0.009324
MAE 0.005953 0.006196 0.006220 0.006703
MAPE 107.9143 103.9420 102.1564 101.8848
TIC 0.871881 0.890858 0.905589 0.922204
BP 0.016650 0.000021 0.000807 0.003409
VP 0.844829 0.837958 0.843370 0.869464
CP 0.138521 0.162021 0.155823 0.127127