Semiparametric estimation and inference using doubly robust moment conditions

We study semiparametric two-step estimators which have the same structure as parametric doubly robust estimators in their second step. The key difference is that we do not impose any parametric restriction on the nuisance functions that are estimated in a first stage, but retain a fully nonparametric model instead. We call these estimators semiparametric doubly robust estimators (SDREs), and show that they possess superior theoretical and practical properties compared to generic semiparametric two-step estimators. In particular, our estimators have substantially smaller first-order bias, allow for a wider range of nonparametric first-stage estimates, rate-optimal choices of smoothing parameters and data-driven estimates thereof, and their stochastic behavior can be well-approximated by classical first-order asymptotics. SDREs exist for a wide range of parameters of interest, particularly in semiparametric missing data and causal inference models. We illustrate our method with a simulation exercise.

Automatic model selection for forecasting brazilian stock returns

This study aims to contribute on the forecasting literature in stock return for emerging markets. We use Autometrics to select relevant predictors among macroeconomic, microeconomic and technical variables. We develop predictive models for the Brazilian market premium, measured as the excess return over Selic interest rate, Itaú SA, Itaú-Unibanco and Bradesco stock returns. We nd that for the market premium, an ADL with error correction is able to outperform the benchmarks in terms of economic performance. For individual stock returns, there is a trade o between statistical properties and out-of-sample performance of the model.

Automatic model selection for forecasting Brazilian stock returns

This study aims to contribute on the forecasting literature in stock return for emerging markets. We use Autometrics to select relevant predictors among macroeconomic, microeconomic and technical variables. We develop predictive models for the Brazilian market premium, measured as the excess return over Selic interest rate, Itaú SA, Itaú-Unibanco and Bradesco stock returns. We find that for the market premium, an ADL with error correction is able to outperform the benchmarks in terms of economic performance. For individual stock returns, there is a trade o between statistical properties and out-of-sample performance of the model.

Inference in differences-in-differences with few treated groups and heteroskedasticity

Differences-in-Differences (DID) is one of the most widely used identification strategies in applied economics. However, how to draw inferences in DID models when there are few treated groups remains an open question. We show that the usual inference methods used in DID models might not perform well when there are few treated groups and errors are heteroskedastic. In particular, we show that when there is variation in the number of observations per group, inference methods designed to work when there are few treated groups tend to (under-) over-reject the null hypothesis when the treated groups are (large) small relative to the control groups. This happens because larger groups tend to have lower variance, generating heteroskedasticity in the group x time aggregate DID model. We provide evidence from Monte Carlo simulations and from placebo DID regressions with the American Community Survey (ACS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS) datasets to show that this problem is relevant even in datasets with large numbers of observations per group. We then derive an alternative inference method that provides accurate hypothesis testing in situations where there are few treated groups (or even just one) and many control groups in the presence of heteroskedasticity. Our method assumes that we can model the heteroskedasticity of a linear combination of the errors. We show that this assumption can be satisfied without imposing strong assumptions on the errors in common DID applications. With many pre-treatment periods, we show that this assumption can be relaxed. Instead, we provide an alternative inference method that relies on strict stationarity and ergodicity of the time series. Finally, we consider two recent alternatives to DID when there are many pre-treatment periods. We extend our inference methods to linear factor models when there are few treated groups. We also derive conditions under which a permutation test for the synthetic control estimator proposed by Abadie et al. (2010) is robust to heteroskedasticity and propose a modification on the test statistic that provided a better heteroskedasticity correction in our simulations.

Inference in differences-in-differences with few treated groups and heteroskedasticity

Differences-in-Differences (DID) is one of the most widely used identification strategies in applied economics. However, how to draw inferences in DID models when there are few treated groups remains an open question. We show that the usual inference methods used in DID models might not perform well when there are few treated groups and errors are heteroskedastic. In particular, we show that when there is variation in the number of observations per group, inference methods designed to work when there are few treated groups tend to (under-) over-reject the null hypothesis when the treated groups are (large) small relative to the control groups. This happens because larger groups tend to have lower variance, generating heteroskedasticity in the group x time aggregate DID model. We provide evidence from Monte Carlo simulations and from placebo DID regressions with the American Community Survey (ACS) and the Current Population Survey (CPS) datasets to show that this problem is relevant even in datasets with large numbers of observations per group. We then derive an alternative inference method that provides accurate hypothesis testing in situations where there are few treated groups (or even just one) and many control groups in the presence of heteroskedasticity. Our method assumes that we know how the heteroskedasticity is generated, which is the case when it is generated by variation in the number of observations per group. With many pre-treatment periods, we show that this assumption can be relaxed. Instead, we provide an alternative application of our method that relies on assumptions about stationarity and convergence of the moments of the time series. Finally, we consider two recent alternatives to DID when there are many pre-treatment groups. We extend our inference method to linear factor models when there are few treated groups. We also propose a permutation test for the synthetic control estimator that provided a better heteroskedasticity correction in our simulations than the test suggested by Abadie et al. (2010).