Volatility prediction comparison via robust volatility proxies: An empirical deviation perspective

Authors: Weichen Wang, Ran An, Ziwei Zhu

48 pages

Abstract: Volatility forecasting is crucial to risk management and portfolio construction. One particular challenge of assessing volatility forecasts is how to construct a robust proxy for the unknown true volatility. In this work, we show that the empirical loss comparison between two volatility predictors hinges on the deviation of the volatility proxy from the true volatility. We then establish non-asymptotic deviation bounds for three robust volatility proxies, two of which are based on clipped data, and the third of which is based on exponentially weighted Huber loss minimization. In particular, in order for the Huber approach to adapt to non-stationary financial returns, we propose to solve a tuning-free weighted Huber loss minimization problem to jointly estimate the volatility and the optimal robustification parameter at each time point. We then inflate this robustification parameter and use it to update the volatility proxy to achieve optimal balance between the bias and variance of the global empirical loss. We also extend this Huber method to construct volatility predictors. Finally, we exploit the proposed robust volatility proxy to compare different volatility predictors on the Bitcoin market data. It turns out that when the sample size is limited, applying the robust volatility proxy gives more consistent and stable evaluation of volatility forecasts.

Submitted to arXiv on 04 Oct. 2021

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2110.01189v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

The summary is not ready yet
Created on 27 Apr. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.