Stochastic volatility

Given the importance of return volatility on a number of practical financial management decisions, the efforts to provide good real- time estimates and forecasts of current and future volatility have been extensive. The main framework used in this context involves stochastic volatility models. In a broad sense, this model class includes GARCH, but we focus on a narrower set of specifications in which volatility follows its own random process, as is common in models originating within financial economics. The distinguishing feature of these specifications is that volatility, being inherently unobservable and subject to independent random shocks, is not measurable with respect to observable information. In what follows, we refer to these models as genuine stochastic volatility models. Much modern asset pricing theory is built on continuous- time models. The natural concept of volatility within this setting is that of genuine stochastic volatility. For example, stochastic-volatility (jump-) diffusions have provided a useful tool for a wide range of applications, including the pricing of options and other derivatives, the modeling of the term structure of risk-free interest rates, and the pricing of foreign currencies and defaultable bonds. The increased use of intraday transaction data for construction of so-called realized volatility measures provides additional impetus for considering genuine stochastic volatility models. As we demonstrate below, the realized volatility approach is closely associated with the continuous-time stochastic volatility framework of financial economics. There are some unique challenges in dealing with genuine stochastic volatility models. For example, volatility is truly latent and this feature complicates estimation and inference. Further, the presence of an additional state variable - volatility - renders the model less tractable from an analytic perspective. We examine how such challenges have been addressed through development of new estimation methods and imposition of model restrictions allowing for closed-form solutions while remaining consistent with the dominant empirical features of the data.Stochastic analysis

Construction and Interpretation of Model-Free Implied Volatility

The notion of model-free implied volatility (MFIV), constituting the basis for the highly publicized VIX volatility index, can be hard to measure with accuracy due to the lack of precise prices for options with strikes in the tails of the return distribution. This is reflected in practice as the VIX index is computed through a tail-truncation which renders it more compatible with the related concept of corridor implied volatility (CIV). We provide a comprehensive derivation of the CIV measure and relate it to MFIV under general assumptions. In addition, we price the various volatility contracts, and hence estimate the corresponding volatility measures, under the standard Black-Scholes model. Finally, we undertake the first empirical exploration of the CIV measures in the literature. Our results indicate that the measure can help us refine and systematize the information embedded in the derivatives markets. As such, the CIV measure may serve as a tool to facilitate empirical analysis of both volatility forecasting and volatility risk pricing across distinct future states of the world for diverse asset categories and time horizons.

Heterogeneous Information Arrivals and Return Volatility Dynamics: Uncovering the Long-Run in High Frequency Returns

Recent empirical evidence suggests that the long-run dependence in financial market volatility is best characterized by a slowly mean-reverting fractionally integrated process. At the same time, much shorter-lived volatility dependencies are typically observed with high-frequency intradaily returns. This paper draws on the information arrival, or mixture-of-distributions hypothesis interpretation of the latent volatility process in rationalizing this behavior. By interpreting the overall volatility as the manifestation of numerous heterogeneous information arrivals, sudden bursts of volatility typically will have both short-run and long-run components. Over intradaily frequencies, the short-run decay stands out most clearly, while the impact of the highly persistent processes will be dominant over longer horizons. These ideas are confirmed by our empirical analysis of a one-year time series of intradaily five-minute Deutschemark - U.S. Dollar returns. Whereas traditional time series based measures for the temporal dependencies in the absolute returns give rise to very conflicting results across different intradaily sampling frequencies, the corresponding semiparametric estimates for the order of fractional integration remain remarkably stable. Similarly, the autocorrelogram for the low-pass filtered absolute returns, obtained by annihilating periods in excess of one day, exhibit a striking hyperbolic rate of decay.

Do bonds span volatility risk in the U.S. Treasury market? a specification test for affine term structure models

We investigate whether bonds span the volatility risk in the U.S. Treasury market, as predicted by most 'affine' term structure models. To this end, we construct powerful and model-free empirical measures of the quadratic yield variation for a cross-section of fixed- maturity zero-coupon bonds ('realized yield volatility') through the use of high-frequency data. We find that the yield curve fails to span yield volatility, as the systematic volatility factors are largely unrelated to the cross- section of yields. We conclude that a broad class of affine diffusive, Gaussian-quadratic and affine jump-diffusive models is incapable of accommodating the observed yield volatility dynamics. An important implication is that the bond markets per se are incomplete and yield volatility risk cannot be hedged by taking positions solely in the Treasury bond market. We also advocate using the empirical realized yield volatility measures more broadly as a basis for specification testing and (parametric) model selection within the term structure literature.Bonds ; Treasury bonds

Answering the Critics: Yes, ARCH Models Do Provide Good Volatility Forecasts

Volatility permeates modern financial theories and decision making processes. As such, accurate measures and good forecasts of future volatility are critical for the implementation and evaluation of asset pricing theories. In response to this, a voluminous literature has emerged for modeling the temporal dependencies in financial market volatility at the daily and lower frequencies using ARCH and stochastic volatility type models. Most of these studies find highly significant in-sample parameter estimates and pronounced intertemporal volatility persistence. Meanwhile, when judged by standard forecast evaluation criteria, based on the squared or absolute returns over daily or longer forecast horizons, ARCH models provide seemingly poor volatility forecasts. The present paper demonstrates that ARCH models, contrary to the above contention, produce strikingly accurate interdaily forecasts for the latent volatility factor that is relevant for most financial applications.

Do Bonds Span Volatility Risk in the U.S. Treasury Market? A Specification test for Affine Term Structure Models

We investigate whether bonds span the volatility risk in the U.S. Treasury market, as predicted by most 'affine' term structure models. To this end, we construct powerful and model-free empirical measures of the quadratic yield variation for a cross-section of fixed-maturity zero-coupon bonds ("realized yield volatility") through the use of high-frequency data. We find that the yield curve fails to span yield volatility, as the systematic volatility factors are largely unrelated to the cross-section of yields. We conclude that a broad class of affine diffusive, Gaussian-quadratic and affine jump-diffusive models is incapable of accommodating the observed yield volatility dynamics. An important implication is that the bond markets per se are incomplete and yield volatility risk cannot be hedged by taking positions solely in the Treasury bond market. We also advocate using the empirical realized yield volatility measures more broadly as a basis for specification testing and (parametric) model selection within the term structure literature.

Realized volatility

Realized volatility is a nonparametric ex-post estimate of the return variation. The most obvious realized volatility measure is the sum of finely-sampled squared return realizations over a fixed time interval. In a frictionless market the estimate achieves consistency for the underlying quadratic return variation when returns are sampled at increasingly higher frequency. We begin with an account of how and why the procedure works in a simplified setting and then extend the discussion to a more general framework. Along the way we clarify how the realized volatility and quadratic return variation relate to the more commonly applied concept of conditional return variance. We then review a set of related and useful notions of return variation along with practical measurement issues (e.g., discretization error and microstructure noise) before briefly touching on the existing empirical applications.Stochastic analysis

No-Arbitrage Semi-Martingale Restrictions for Continuous-Time Volatility Models subject to Leverage Effects, Jumps and i.i.d. Noise: Theory and Testable Distributional Implications

We develop a sequential procedure to test the adequacy of jump-diffusion models for return distributions. We rely on intraday data and nonparametric volatility measures, along with a new jump detection technique and appropriate conditional moment tests, for assessing the import of jumps and leverage effects. A novel robust-to-jumps approach is utilized to alleviate microstructure frictions for realized volatility estimation. Size and power of the procedure are explored through Monte Carlo methods. Our empirical findings support the jump-diffusive representation for S&P500 futures returns but reveal it is critical to account for leverage effects and jumps to maintain the underlying semi-martingale assumption.

Correcting the Errors: A Note on Volatility Forecast Evaluation Based on High-Frequency Data and Realized Volatilities

This note develops general model-free adjustment procedures for the calculation of unbiased volatility loss functions based on practically feasible realized volatility benchmarks. The procedures, which exploit the recent asymptotic distributional results in Barndorff-Nielsen and Shephard (2002a), are both easy-to-implement and highly accurate in empirically realistic situations. On properly accounting for the measurement errors in the volatility forecast evaluations reported in Andersen, Bollerslev, Diebold and Labys (2003), the adjustments result in markedly higher estimates for the true degree of return-volatility predictability. Cette note développe des méthodes d'ajustement, sans spécifier le modèle, qui corrigent le biais induit par les erreurs de mesures de la volatilité dans la mesure de performance des méthodes de prévision de la volatilité. Les procédures, qui utilisent la récente théorie asymptotique de Barndorff-Nielsen et Shephard (2002a), sont faciles à mettre en ?uvre et très performantes dans les situations empiriques usuelles. En particulier, la prise en compte des erreurs de mesures dans les procédures de prévision de Andersen, Bollerslev, Diebold et Labys (2003), amène à des performances de prévision de la volatilité très élevées.Measurement errors; model-free adjustment procedures; integrated volatility; realized volatility; high-frequency data; time series forecasting; Mincer-Zarnowitz regressions, Erreurs de mesure; méthode d'ajustement; volatilité intégrée, volatilité réalisée; données à haute fréquence; prévision de série chronologiques; régressions de Mincer-Zarnowitz