<<

RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Lecture 13 Series: Stationarity, AR(p) & MA(q)

1

Time Series: Introduction

• In the early 1970’s, it was discovered that simple models performed better than the complicated multivarate, then popular, 1960s macro models (FRB-MIT-Penn). See, Nelson (1972).

• The tools? Simple univariate (ARIMA) models, popularized by the textbook of Box & Jenkins (1970).

Q: What is a time series? A time series yt is a process observed in over time, t = 1,...., T  Yt={y1, y2 ,y3, ..., yT}

• Main Issue with Time Series: Dependence.

Given the sequential nature of Yt, we expect yt & yt-1 to be dependent. Depending on assumptions, classical results (based on LLN & CLT) may not be valid.

1 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series: Introduction

• Usually, time series models are separated into two categories:

– Univariate (yt ∊ , it is scalar)  primary model: Autoregressions (ARs). m – Multivariate (yt ∊ R , it vector-valued).  primary model: Vectot autoregressions (VARs).

• In time series, {..., y1, y2 ,y3, ..., yT} are jointly RV. We want to model the conditional expectation:

E[yt| Ft-1]

where Ft-1 = {yt-1, yt-2 ,yt-3, ...} is the past history of the series.

Time Series: Introduction

• Two popular models for E[yt|Ft-1]:

– An autoregressive (AR) process models E[yt|Ft-1] with lagged dependent variables.

• A moving (MA) process models E[yt|Ft-1] with lagged errors.

• Usually, E[yt|Ft-1] has been modeled as a linear process. But, recently, non-linearities have become more common.

• In general, we assume the error term, εt, is uncorrelated with anything, with 0 and constant , σ2. We call a process like this a white (WN) process. We denote it as 2 εt ~ WN(0, σ )

2 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series: Introduction

• We want to select an appropriate time series model to forecast yt. In this class, the choices are AR(p), MA(q) or ARMA(p, q).

• Steps for : (1) Identify the appropriate model. That is, determine p, q. (2) Estimate the model. (3) Test the model. (4) Forecast.

• In this lecture, we go over the (stationarity, and MDS CLT), the main models (AR, MA & ARMA) and tools that will help us describe and identify a proper model

CLM Revisited: Time Series With autocorrelated , we get dependent observations. Recall,

t = t-1 + ut

The independence assumption (A2’) is violated. The LLN and the CLT cannot be easily applied, in this context. We need new tools and definitions.

We will introduce the concepts of stationarity and ergodicity. The ergodic theorem will give us a counterpart to the LLN.

To get asymptotic distributions, we also need a CLT for dependent variables, using the concept of and stationarity. Or we can rely on the martingale CLT.

3 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series – Stationarity

• Consider the joint of the collection of RVs: F ( z , z ,..... z )  P(Z  z , Z  z ,... Z  z ) t1 t2 tn t1 t1 t2 t2 tn tn

Then, we say that a process is 1st order stationary if F (z )  F (z ) for any t ,k t1 t1 k 1 nd F(z , z )  F(z , z ) for any t ,t ,k 2 order stationary if t1 t2 t1k t2 k 1 2 F(z .....z )  F(z .....z ) for anyt ,t ,k Nth-order stationary if t1 tn t1k tn k 1 n

• Definition. A process is strongly (strictly) stationary if it is a Nth-order for any N.

Time Series – Moments

• The moments describe a distribution. We calculate the moments as usual: E ( Z t )   t   Z t f ( z t ) dz t 2 2 2 Var ( Z t )   t  E ( Z t   t )   ( Z t   t ) f ( z t ) dz t Cov ( Z , Z )  E [( Z   )( Z   )]   (t  t ) t1 t 2 t1 t1 t 2 t 2 1 2

 (t1  t 2 )  (t1 , t 2 )   2  2 t1 t 2

Note: γ(t1-t2) is called the auto- –think of it as a function of k = t1 – t2. γ(0) is the variance. • Stationarity requires all these moments to be independent of time.

• If the moments are time dependent, we say the series is non-stationary.

4 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series – Moments

2 2 • For strictly stationary process:  t   and  t   because F (z )  F (z )       t1 t1 k t1 t1 k

2 provided that E( Zt )  , E(Z t )   Then, F ( z , z )  F ( z , z )  t1 t2 t1  k t2  k cov( z , z )  cov( z , z )  t1 t2 t1  k t 2  k

 (t1 , t 2 )   (t1  k , t 2  k )

let t1  t  k and t 2  t, then

 (t1 , t 2 )   (t  k , t )   (t, t  k )   k

The correlation between any two RVs depends on the time difference.

Time Series – Weak Stationarity

• A process is said to be N-order weakly stationary if all its joint moments up to order N exist and are time invariant.

• A Covariance stationary process (or 2nd order weakly stationary) has: - constant mean - constant variance - depends on time difference between R.V.

That is, Zt is covariance stationary if:

E(Zt )  constant

Var(Zt )  constant Cov(Z , Z )  E[(Z   )(Z   )]  (t  t )  f (t  t ) t1 t2 t1 t1 t2 t2 1 2 1 2

5 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series – Weak Stationarity

2 Examples: For all assume εt ~ WN(0,σ )

1) yt = Φ yt-1 + εt E[yt ] = 0 (assuming Φ≠1) 2 2 Var[yt] = σ /(1-Φ ) (assuming |Φ|<11) 2 E[yt yt-1] = Φ E[yt-1 ]  stationary, not time dependent

2) yt = μ + yt-1 + εt  yt = μ t + Σj=0 to t-1 εt-j + y0 E[yt ] = μ t + y0 2 2 Var[yt] = Σj=0 to t-1 σ = σ t  non-stationary, time dependent

Stationary Series

Examples:

yt  .08   t  .4  t1  t ~ WN

yt  .13 yt1   t

% Changes in USD/GBP (1978:I-2011:IV) 0.2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 -0.05 1 9 17 25 33 41 49 57 65 73 81 89 97 105 113 121 129

% change -0.1 -0.15 -0.2 -0.25 Time

6 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Non-Stationary Series

Examples:

yt   t  1 yt 1  2 yt2   t  t ~ WN

yt    yt 1   t RW with drift

US CPI Prices (1978:I-2011:IV) 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 US CPI 40.0 20.0 0.0 1 10192837465564738291100109118127136

Time Series – Ergodicity • We want to allow as much dependence as the LLN allows us to do it. • But, stationarity is not enough, as the following example shows:

• Example: Let {Ut} be a sequence of i.i.d. RVs uniformly distributed on [0, 1] and let Z be N(0,1) independent of {Ut}.

Define Yt= Z+Ut . Then Yt is stationary (why?), but

n 1 no 1 Yn  Yt  E(Yt )  n t1 2 1 Y  Z p n 2

The problem is that there is too much dependence in the sequence {Yt} (because of Z). In fact the correlation between Y1 and Yt is always positive for any value of t.

7 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series – Ergodicity of the Mean

• We want to estimate the mean of the process {Zt}, μ(Zt). But, we need to distinguishing between ensemble average and time average: m  Z i - Ensemble Average z  i  1 m n  Z t - Time Series Average z  t  1 n Q: Which is the most appropriate? A: Ensemble Average. But, it is impossible to calculate. We only observe

one Zt.

• Q: Under which circumstances we can use the time average (only one

realization of {Zt})? Is the time average an unbiased and consistent estimator of the mean? The Ergodic Theorem gives us the answer.

Time Series – Ergodicity of the Mean

• Recall the sufficient conditions for consistency of an estimator: the estimator is asymptotically unbiased and its variance asymptotically collapses to zero. 1. Q: Is the time average is asymptotically unbiased? Yes. 1 1 E ( z )  E ( Z t )     n ttn 2. Q: Is the variance going to zero as T grows? It depends.

1 n n  n n  n var(z)  cov(Z ,Z )  0   0 (   )  2  t s 2  ts 2  t1 t2 tn n t11s n t11s n t1

0  [(0 1 n1) (1 0 1 n2)  n2

((n1) (n2) 0)] 

8 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series – Ergodicity of the Mean

 n 1  k var( z)  0 (n  k )  0 (1  ) 2 k k n kk (n 1) n n

 0 k ? lim var( z)  lim (1  ) k  0 n  n   n k n

• If the Zt were uncorrelated, the variance of the time average would be O(n-1). Since independent random variables are necessarily uncorrelated (but not vice versa), we have just recovered a form of the LLN for independent data.

Q: How can we make the remaining part, the sum over the upper triangle of the covariance , go to zero as well?

A: We need to impose conditions on ρk. Conditions weaker than "they are all zero;" but, strong enough to exclude the sequence of identical copies.

Time Series – Ergodicity of the Mean

• We use two inequalities to put upper bounds on the variance of the time average: n1 nt n1 nt n1   k    k    k t1 k1 t1 k 1 t1 k 1 can be negative, so we upper-bound the sum of the actual covariances by the sum of their magnitudes. Then, we extend the inner sum so it covers all lags. This might of course be infinite (sequence-of- identical-copies). • Definition: A covariance-stationary process is ergodic for the mean if

p lim z  E (Z t )   Ergodicity Theorem: Then, a sufficient condition for ergodicity for the mean is  k  0 as k  

9 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series – Ergodicity of 2nd Moments

• A sufficient condition to ensure ergodicity for second moments is:

  k   k A process which is ergodic in the first and second moments is usually referred as ergodic in the wide sense .

• Ergodicity under Gaussian Distribution If {Zt}is a stationary ,  k   k is sufficient to ensure ergodicity for all moments.

Note: Recall that only the first two moments are needed to describe the .

Time Series – Ergodicity – Theorems

• We state two essential theorems to the of stationary time series. Difficult to prove in general.

Theorem I

If yt is strictly stationary and ergodic and xt = f(yt, yt-1, yt-2 , ...) is a RV, then xt is strictly stationary and ergodic.

Theorem II (Ergodic Theorem)

If yt is strictly stationary and ergodic and E[yt] <∞; then as T→ ∞;

1 p  yt  E[ yt ] T t • These results allow us to consistently estimate parameters using time-series moments.

10 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Time Series - MDS

• Definition: εt is a martingale difference sequence (MDS) if

E[εt| Ft-1]=0.

• Regression errors are naturally a MDS. Some time-series processes may be a MDS as a consequence of optimizing behaviour. For example, most asset pricing models imply that asset returns should be the sum of a constant plus a MDS.

• Useful property: εt is uncorrelated with any function of the lagged information Ft-1. Then, for k > 0  E[yt-k εt] = 0.

Time Series – MDS CLT

Theorem (MDS CLT)

If ut is a strictly stationary and ergodic MDS and E(ut ut’) = Ω < ∞; then as T→ ∞; 1 d  u t  N (0, ) T t

• Application: Let xt ={yt-1, yt-2 , ... }, a vector of lagged yt’s.

Then (xt εt) is a MDS. We can apply the MDS CLT Theorem. Then,

1 d 2  xt  t  N (0, ),   E[xt xt ' t ] T t

• Like in the derivation of asymptotic distribution of OLS, the above result is the key to establish the asymptotic distribution in a time series context.

11 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Autoregressive (AR) Process

• We want to model the conditional expectation of yt:

E[yt|Ft-1]

where Ft-1 = {yt-1, yt-2 ,yt-3, ...} is the past history of the series. We 2 assume the error term, εt = yt –E[yt|Ft-1], follows a WN(0,σ ).

• An AR process models E[yt|Ft-1] with lagged dependent variables.

• The most common models are AR models. An AR(1) model involves a single lag, while an AR(p) model involves p lags.

Example: A linear AR(p) model (the most popular in practice):

yt    1 yt1  2 yt2  .... p yt p  t

with E[εt|Ft-1]=0.

AR Process – Lag Operator

• Define the operator L as

k L zt  ztk • It is usually called Lag operator. But it can produces lagged or forward variables (for negative values of k). For example: 3 L zt  zt3 • Also note that if c is a constant  L c = c.

• Sometimes the notation for L when working as a lag operator is B (backshift operator), and when working as a forward operator is F.

• Important application: Differencing

zt  (1 L)zt  zt  zt 1 d d  zt  (1 L) zt

12 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Autoregressive (AR) Process

• Let’s work with the linear AR(p) model is: p yt    1 yt 1  2 yt2  ....   p yt  p  t     i yt i  t i1 p i yt     i L yt  t L : Lag operator i1 • We can write this process as: 1 2 p (L) yt    t where (L)  1 1L  L 2  ....   p L

(L) is called the autoregressive of yt. Note that 1 yt  (L) (t )

delivers an infinite sum on the εt-j’s  an MA(∞) process!

• Q: Can we do this inversion?

AR Process - Stationarity

• Let’s compute moments of yt using the infinite sum (assume μ=0): 1 E[ yt ]   (L) E[ t ]  0   (L)  0 2 2 Var [ yt ]   (L) Var [ t ]   (L)  0

E[ yt yt  j ]   (t  j)  E[(1 yt 1 yt  j  2 yt 2 yt  j ....   p yt  p yt  j   t yt  j )]

 1 ( j 1)  2 ( j  2)  ....   p ( j  p)

where, abusing notation,  2 2 1 2 2 2 2 p  ( L )  1 /(1   1 L  L  2 L  ....   p L ) Using the fundamental theorem of algebra, (z) can be factored as 1 1 1 (z)  (1 r1 z)(1 r2 z)...(1 rp z)

where the r1, .... rk ∈ C are the roots of (z). If the j’s coefficients are all real, the roots are either real or come in complex conjugate pairs.

13 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Stationarity

Theorem: The linear AR(p) process is strictly stationary and ergodic

if and only if |rj|>1 for all j, where |rj| is the modulus of the complex number rj.

• We usually say “all roots lie outside the unit circle.”

Note: If one of the rj’s equals 1, (L) (& yt) has a –i.e., Φ(1)=0. This is a special case of non-stationarity.

-1 • Recall (L) produces an infinite sum on the εt-j’s. If this sum does not explode, we say the process is stable.

• If the process is stable, we can calculate δyt/δεt-j: How much yt is affected today by an innovation (a shock) t  j periods ago. We call this the impulse response function (IRF).

AR Process – Example: AR(1)

Example: AR(1) process

yt     yt 1   t E[   ]  E[ y ]  t    *    1 (r  0) t 1   1   1 2 Var [ t ]  2 Var [ yt ]   ; since   0 |  | 1 (r1  1) (1   2 ) (1   2 )

 1 /(1   i )   ij i  1,2 Note:  j  0

These infinite sums will not explode () if |φ|<1  stationarity condition.

Under this condition, we can calculate the impulse response function: j δyt/δεt-j = φ

14 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Example: AR(1)

• The function is:

 k  Cov Y t , Y t  k   E Y t   Y t  k   

 k  E  Y t 1     t Y t  k  

 k  E Y t 1   Y t  k    E  t Y t  k  

 k   k 1  E  t Y t  k     k 1

• There is a recursive formula for γk:

 1   0 2  2    0    0 k  k    0

• Again, when ||<1, the autocovariance do not explode as k increases. There is an exponential decay towards zero.

AR Process – Example: AR(1)

k • Note:  k    0 – when 0 <  < 1  All autocovariances are positive.

– when 1<  < 0  The sign of γk shows an alternating pattern beginning a negative value.

• The AR(1) process has the : The distribution of Yt given {Yt-1, Yt-2, …} is the same as the distribution of Yt given {Yt-1}.

15 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Example: AR(2) Example: AR(2) process

2 yt    1 yt 1   2 yt  2   t  (1  1 L   2 L ) yt     t

2 We can invert (1 – 1 L – 2L ) to get the MA(∞) process.

• Stationarity Check

–E[yt] = μ/(1 – 1 – 2)= μ*  1 + 2 ≠1. 2 2 2 2 2 –Var[yt] = σ /(1 – 1 – 2 )  1 + 2 < 1 Stationarity condition: |1+ 2 |<1

• The analysis can be simplified by rewriting the AR(2) in matrix form as an AR(1):

 y t    1  2   y t 1   t  ~ ~ ~ ~               y t    Ay t 1  t  y t 1   0   1 0   y t  2   0  Note: Now, we check [ I – Ai ] (i=1,2) for stationarity conditions

AR Process – Stationarity

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ y t    Ay t 1  t  y t  [ I  AL ] t  Note: Recall I  F 1   F j  I  F  F 2  ... j0 Checking that [I – AL] is not singular, same as checking that Aj does not explode. The stability of the system can be determined by the

eigenvalues of A. That is, get the λi’s and check if |λi|<1 for all i.

1  2  1    2  A     | A  I | det    (1   )   2  1 0   1   

• If |λi| <1 for all i=1,2, yt is stable (it does not explode) and stationary. Then: 12  2  12  2  1

1  2  1  1  2  1  2

16 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Stationarity

• The autocovariance function is given by:

 k  EYt   Yt k   

 E1 Yt 1    2 Yt 2     t Yt k  

 1 k 1  2 k 2  E t Yt k   • Again a recursive formula. Let’s get the first :

 0   1  1   2   2  E  t Y t    2   1 1   2  2  

 1   1 0   2  1  E  t Y t  1  

 1  0   1 0   2  1   1  1   2

 2   1 1   2  2  E  t Y t  2   2 2  1   2   2   1 1   2  2   2   0 1   2

AR Process – Stationarity

• The AR(2) in matrix AR(1) form is called Vector AR(1) or VAR(1).

Nice property: The VAR(1) is Markov -i.e., forecasts depend only on today’s data.

• It is straightforward to apply the VAR formulation to any AR(p) processes. We can also use the same eigenvalue conditions to check the stationarity of AR(p) processes.

17 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process –

• The AR(p) model: 1 2 p (L) yt    t where (L)  1 1L  L 2  ....   p L

1 Then, yt (L) (t ),  an MA(∞) process!

• But, we need to make sure that we can invert the polynomial (L).

• When (L) ≠0, we say the process yt is causal (strictly speaking, a causal function of {εt}).

Definition: A linear process {yt} is causal if there is a 2  (L)  1   1 L   2 L  ...  with |  (L) |    j 0 j

with yt   (L) t .

AR Process – Causality

Example: AR(1) process:

(L) yt    t , where (L)  1 1L

Then, yt is causal if and only if: |1| <1 or

the root r1 of the polynomial (z) = 1 − 1 z satisfies |r1|>1.

• Q: How do we calculate the Ψ‘s coefficients for an AR(p)? A: coefficients:

  1 1  1 i i Y t     t    1 L  t 1   1 L i  0 2 2 i  1   1 L   1 L    t   i   1 , i  0

18 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Calculating the ψ’s

• Example: AR(2) - Calculating the ψ‘s by matching coefficients. 1   L   L 2 y       L  L  1  1 2  t  t      L

 0  1

 1   1 2  2   1   2 3  3   1  2 1 2

 j   1  j 1   2  j  2 , j  2

We can solve these linear difference equations in several ways: - Numerically - Guess the form of a solution and using an inductive proof - Using the theory of linear difference equations.

AR Process – Estimation and Properties

• Define xt  (1 yt1 yt2 ....yt p )

  ( 1 2 ....  p )

Then the model can be written as yt  xt '  t

ˆ x 1 • The OLS estimator is b   t ( X ' X ) X ' y

• Recall that ut= xtεt is a MDS. It is also strictly stationary and ergodic.

1 1 p x t  t  u t  E [u t ]  0. T ttT

• The vector xt is strictly stationary and ergodic, and by Theorem I so is xt xt’. Then, by the Ergodic Theorem 1 p  x t x t '   E [ x t x t ' ]  Q T t

19 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Estimation and Properties

• Consistency Putting together the previous results, the OLS estimator can be rewritten as: 1  1   1  b  ˆ  (X' X)1 X' y   x x '  x '  T  t t  T  t t   t   t 

xt Then, 1  1   1  b   x x '  x '  p Q10   T  t t  T  t t   t   t 

 the OLS estimator is consistent.

AR Process – Asymptotic Distribution

• Asymptotic Normality

We apply the MDS CLT to xtεt. Then, it is straightforward to derive the asymptotic distribution of the estimator (similar to the OLS case):

Theorem If the AR(p) process yt is strictly stationary and ergodic 4 and E[yt ], then as T→ ∞;

d 1 1 2 T (b   )  N(0,Q Q ),   E[xt xt ' ]

• Identical in form to the asymptotic distribution of OLS in cross- section regression  asymptotic inference is the same.

• The asymptotic is estimated just as in the cross- section case: The sandwich estimator.

20 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Bootstrap

• So far, we constructed the bootstrap sample by randomly

from the data values (yt,xt). This created an i.i.d bootstrap sample.

• This is inappropriate for time-series, since we have dependence.

• There are two popular methods to bootstrap time series. (1) Model-Based (Parametric) Bootstrap (2) Block Resampling Bootstrap

AR Process – Bootstrap

(1) Model-Based (Parametric) Bootstrap 1. Estimate b and residuals e:

2. Fix an initial condition {yt-k+1, yt-k+2 ,yt-k+3, ..., y0} 3. Simulate i.i.d. draws e* from the empirical distribution of the

residuals {e1, e2 , e3, ..., eT}.

4. Create the bootstrap series yt by the recursive formula ˆ ˆ ˆ yt *  ˆ  1 yt1 * 2 yt2 * ....   p yt  p * t *

Pros: Simple. Similar to the usual bootstrap.

Cons: This construction imposes homoskedasticity on the errors e* ; which may be different than the properties of the actual e. It also imposes the AR(p) as the DGP.

21 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

AR Process – Bootstrap

(2) Block Resampling 1. Divide the sample into T/m blocks of length m. 2. Resample complete blocks. For each simulated sample, draw T/m blocks.

3. Paste the blocks together to create the bootstrap time-series yt*.

Pros: It allows for arbitrary stationary serial correlation, heteroskedasticity, and for model misspecification.

Cons: It may be sensitive to the block length, and the way that the data are partitioned into blocks. May not work well in small samples.

Moving Average Process

• An MA process models E[yt|Ft-1] with lagged error terms. An MA(q) model involves q lags.

• We keep the assumption for εt.

Example: A linear MA(q) model:

q yt     t 1 t1 2 t2 ...q tq    i ti   t i1 q i 2 q yt    i L t   t    (L) t  (L) 11L 2 L ...q L i1

• Q: Is yt stationary? Check the moments.

22 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

Moving Average Process – Stationarity

•Q: Is yt stationary? Check the moments. WLOG, assume μ=0.

E[ yt ]  0 2 2 2 2 Var[ yt ]  (11  2  ...  q )

 (t  j)  E[ yt yt j ]  E[(1 t1 yt j  2 t 2 yt j  ....  q t q yt  j   t yt j )] q   2[   ] | k | q;  (t  j)   j1 j j |k| otherwise 0.

• It is easy to verify that the sums are finite  MA(q) is stationary.

• Note that an MA(q) process can generate an AR process. 1 yt (L)t (L) yt *t • We have an infinite sum polynomial on θL. That is, an AR(∞).   (L)y  * j0 j t t

MA Process – Invertibility

• We need to make sure that θ(L)-1 is defined: We require θ(L) ≠ 0.

When this condition is met, we can write εt as a causal function of yt. We say the MA is invertible. For this to hold, we require:

 |  ( L ) |    j  0 j

Definition: A linear process {yt} is invertible strictly speaking, an invertible function of {εt}, if there is a

2 ( L )  1  1 L   2 L  ...  with |  ( L ) |    j  0 j

with  t  ( L ) y t .

23 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

MA Process – Example: MA(1)

• Example: MA(1) process:

yt     (L) t  (L)  1 1L - Moments

EYt   2 2 2 0  Varyt    1  2 1  E[yt , yt1]  1

 k  E[yt , ytk ]  0, k  1 Note: The autocovariance function is zero after lag 1.

-1 – Invertibility: If |θ1|<1, we can write (1+ θ1 L) yt + μ* = εt  2 2 j j (1 1L  1 L  ...  1 L  ...) yt  *   *  i (L) yt  t i1

MA Process – Example: MA(2)

• Example: MA(2) process: 2 yt     (L) t  (L)  11L  2 L - Moments

EYt   2 2 2  11 2 , k  0     2 1 , k 1   1 2 k  2  2 , k  2   0, k  2

Note: the autocovariance function is zero after lag 2.

24 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

MA Process – Example: MA(2)

2 - Inveritbility: The roots of    1    2  0 all lie inside the unit circle. It can be shown the invertibility condition for MA(2) process is:

1   2  1

 2  1  1

 1   2  1

MA Process – Estimation • MA are more complicated to estimate. In particular, there are nonlinearities. Consider an MA(1):

yt = εt + θ εt-1

2 The auto-correlation is ρ1 = θ/(1+θ ). Then, MM estimate of θ satisfies: ˆ 1 1 4r 2 r   ˆ  1 1 ˆ 2 (1  ) 2r1 • A nonlinear solution and difficult to solve.

• Alternatively, if |θ|< 1, we can try a ∈(-1; 1),

2  t (a)  yt  a yt 1  a yt 2  ... and look (numerically) for the least-square estimator

T ˆ  arg min{ S (a)   2 (a)} a T  t 1 t

25 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

The Wold Decomposition

Theorem - Wold (1938).

Any covariance stationary {yt} has infinite order, moving-average representation:

 y   Lj   ,   1, t  j0 j t t 0

where t : deterministic term (perfectly forecastable). Say, t     2    j0 j 2 t ~ WN(0, )

• yt is a linear combination of innovations over time.

• A stationary process can be represented as an MA(∞) plus a deterministic “trend.”

The Wold Decomposition

Example:

Let xt= yt – κt. Then, check moments:

 E[x ]  E[y   ]   E[ ]  0. t t t  j0 j t j   E[x 2 ]  2 E[2 ]  2 2  . t  j0 j t j  j0 j

E[xt , xt j ]  E[(t  1t1  2t2 ...)(t j  1t j1  2t j2 ...)   2 (       ...)  2   j 1 j1 2 j2 k0 k k2

Xt is a covariance stationary process.

26 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

ARMA Process

• A combination of AR(p) and MA(q) processes produces an ARMA(p, q) process:

yt   1 yt1 2 yt2  ....  p yt p   t 1 t1 2 t2 ... q tq p q i    i yti  i L t   t i1 i1

 (L)yt    (L) t

• Usually, we insist that (L)≠0, θ(L)≠0 & that the (L), θ(L) have no common factors. This implies it is not a lower order ARMA model.

ARMA Process

Example: Common factors. Suppose we have the following ARMA(2,3) model (L)yt  (L)t with (L)  1.6L  .3L2 (L)  11.4L  .9L2 .3L3  (1.6L  .3L2 )(1 L)

This model simplifies to: yt  (1L)t  an MA(1) process.

 p L • Pure AR Representation: L yt    at   L   q L

q L • Pure MA Representation: yt     L at   L   p L • Special ARMA(p,q) cases: – p = 0: MA(q) – q = 0: AR(p).

27 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

ARMA: Stationarity, Causality and Invertibility

Theorem: If (L) and θ(L) have no common factors, a (unique) stationary solution to  ( L ) y t   ( L )  t exists if and only if

2 p | z | 1   (z)  1 1 z  2 z  ...   p z  0.

This ARMA(p, q) model is causal if and only if

2 p | z | 1  (z)  1 1z  2 z  ...   p z  0.

This ARMA(p, q) model is invertible if and only if

2 p | z | 1   (z)  1 1 z  2 z  ...   p z  0.

• Note: Real data cannot be exactly modeled using a finite number of parameters. We choose p, q to create a good approximated model.

ARMA Process – SDE Representation

• Consider the ARMA(p,q) model:

(L)( yt  )   (L) t

Let xt  yt   and wt  (L) t .

Then, xt  1 xt 1   2 xt  2  ....   p xt  p  wt

 xt is a p-th-order linear difference equation (SDE).

xt   xt 1   t Example: 1st-order SDE (AR(1)):

  Recursive solutiont 1 (Wold tform): t 1 x t   x 1     t  i   x 1    i t  i i  0 i  0

where x 1 is an initial condition.

28 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

ARMA Process – Dynamic Multiplier

• The dynamic multiplier measurers the effect of εt on subsequent values of xt: That is, the first derivative on the Wold representation: δxt+j/δεt = δxj/δε0 = ψj.

For an AR(1) process: j δxt+j/δεt = δxj/δε0 =  .

• That is, the dynamic multiplier for any linear SDE depends only on the length of time j, not on time t.

ARMA Process – Impulse Response Function

• The impulse-response function (IRF) a sequence of dynamic multipliers

as a function of time from the one time change in the innovation, εt.

• Usually, IRF are represented with a graph, that measures the effect

of the innovation, εt, on yt over time: δyt+j/δεt+ δyt+j+1/δεt + δyt+j+21/δεt+...= ψj + ψj+1+ ψj+2+...

• Once we estimate the ARMA coefficients, it is easy to draw an IRF.

29 RS – EC2 - Lecture 13

ARMA Process – Addition

• Q: We add two ARMA process, what order do we get?

• Adding MA processes

xt  A(L) t

zt  C (L)u t

yt  xt  zt  A(L) t  C (L)u t - Under independence:

 y ( j)  E[ yt yt  j ]  E[( xt  zt )( xt  j  zt  j )]

 E[( xt xt  j  zt zt  j )]   x ( j)   z ( j)

- Then, γ(j) = 0 for j > Max(qx, qz,)  yt is ARMA(0, max(qx, qz))

- Implication: MA(2) + MA(1) = MA(2)

ARMA Process – Addition

• Q: We add two ARMA process, what order do we get?

• Adding AR processes

(1  A(L)) xt   t

(1  C (L)) zt  ut

yt  xt  zt  ? - Rewrite system as:

(1C(L))(1 A(L))xt  (1C(L))t

(1 A(L))(1C(L))zt  (1 A(L))ut

(1 A(L))(1C(L))yt  (1C(L))t (1 A(L))ut  t ut [C(L)t  A(L)ut ]

- Then, yt is ARMA(px+pz , max(px, pz))

30