The Power of Bootstrap Tests of Cointegration Rank with Financial Time Series

Bootstrap likelihood ratio tests of cointegration rank are commonly used because they tend to have rejection probabilities that are closer to the nominal level than the rejection probabilities of the correspond- ing asymptotic tests. The e¤ect of bootstrapping the test on its power is largely unknown. We show that a new computationally inexpensive procedure can be applied to the estimation of the power function of the bootstrap test of cointegration rank. The bootstrap test is found to have a power function close to that of the level-adjusted asymp- totic test. The bootstrap test estimates the level-adjusted power of the asymptotic test highly accurately. The bootstrap test may have low power to reject the null hypothesis of cointegration rank zero, or underestimate the cointegration rank. An empirical application to Euribor interest rates is provided as an illustration of the findings.

Practical Proposals for Specifying k-Nearest Neighbours Weights Matrices

In this article we introduce and evaluate testing procedures for specifying the number k of nearest neighbours in the weights matrix of spatial econometric models. The spatial J-test is used for specification search. Two testing procedures are suggested: an increasing neighbours testing procedure and a decreasing neighbours testing procedure. Simulations show that the increasing neighbours testing procedures can be used in large samples to determine k. The decreasing neighbours testing procedure is found to have low power, and is not recommended for use in practice. An empirical example involving house price data is provided to show how to use the testing procedures with real data.

Unrealized expectations of jumps in volatility: An explanation to the low and time-varying predictive power of implied volatility

The low predictive power of implied volatility in forecasting the subsequently realized volatility is a well-documented empirical puzzle. As suggested by e.g. Feinstein (1989), Jackwerth and Rubinstein (1996), and Bates (1997), we test whether unrealized expectations of jumps in volatility could explain this phenomenon. Our findings show that expectations of infrequently occurring jumps in volatility are indeed priced in implied volatility. This has two important consequences. First, implied volatility is actually expected to exceed realized volatility over long periods of time only to be greatly less than realized volatility during infrequently occurring periods of very high volatility. Second, the slope coefficient in the classic forecasting regression of realized volatility on implied volatility is very sensitive to the discrepancy between ex ante expected and ex post realized jump frequencies. If the in-sample frequency of positive volatility jumps is lower than ex ante assessed by the market, the classic regression test tends to reject the hypothesis of informational efficiency even if markets are informationally effective.