Anybody can ask a question

Cross Validated is a question and answer site

for people interested in statistics, machine
learning, data analysis, data mining, and data
visualization. It only takes a minute to sign up. Anybody can answer

Sign up to join this community The best answers are voted up and
rise to the top

SPONSORED BY

Modelling time varying volatility when GARCH(1,1) coefficients sum to

value greater one
Asked 5 years, 5 months ago Active 5 years, 5 months ago Viewed 1k times

First of all I have to admit that I am not a time-series expert so any help is highly appreciated. I have a financial time-series (a
fixed income total return index measured on a weekly basis) for which I would like to fit an AR model. However, I would like to
2 take into account the time varying volatility of the series. In particular, the volatility of the series is very low at the beginning of
the series, increases sharply at the end of 2008 and shrinks again:

The log returns exhibit this even more clearly:

By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.
 I decided upon the order of the AR model by using different information criteria which lead me to an AR(1) model for the log
return time-series. After that I tested for ARCH effects using a Lagrange-Multiplier-Test. It turned out that ARCH effects are
significant for all tested 12 lags. Considering the high order of the lags I considered a GARCH(1,1) for the conditional
volatility. The problem is that the estimated coefficients sum to a value greater than one (α 1 + β1 = 0.97 + 0.56 = 1.53)
implying that volatility is growing without bounds which is clearly undesirable and also is contradictory to the graph. So my
questions are:

1. Which alternative model could I use to model this behavior of the volatility of the series considering that my primarily
interest is in the coefficient values for the AR(1)?
2. When modelling the conditional mean of the series the classic approach would be to integrate the series. Is there a
similar approach considerable for the volatility?

3. As the series has only 534 observations how likely is this to be the reason for the sum of the mentioned coefficients to be
greater than 1?
By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.
I would be also very happy about any hint to a particular Stata or R command that seem promising to model the volatility of
 I would be also very happy about any hint to a particular Stata or R command that seem promising to model the volatility of
this time series. However, I think this is primarily an econometrics question. Thanks for your time and effort!

time-series maximum-likelihood stata arima garch

edited Jun 18 '15 at 13:33 asked Jun 9 '15 at 20:27

Roberto Liebscher
232 1 9

1 Answer Active Oldest Votes

First, you have not told us what this series represents. Subject-matter knowledge is generally useful when trying to model the
3 data.

the volatility of the series is increasing <...> The log returns exhibit this even more clearly

It would be more accurate to say that volatility has been very low in the beginning, high for a while and then quite low again.
There is no linear trend in the magnitude of volatility -- see your second figure.

1. Which alternative model could I use to model this behavior of the volatility of the series <...> ?

You may want to reconsider the model for the conditional mean first. Perhaps you could model the apparent trend in the
original series and the dip during approx. 2009 by including some other explanatory variables and turning the AR model into
an ARX model. Also, you could consider ARCH-in-mean specification, as the volatility seems to have been the highest when
the series was going down.
Now to answer the question, there is a great variety of GARCH models suited for different features of the data. One survey
(not necessarily the best) can be found here: Terasvirta "An introduction to univariate GARCH models" (2009). You could take
a look at the stylized facts and the characteristics of the different models and see if there is one that suits you.
You could also have a GARCH model with exogenous variables. E.g. a GARCH model with a time trend could suit a case
where conditional variance is increasing linearly (which does not seem to be the case here, though). Or you could have an
IGARCH model where the conditional variance is an integrated process. That also answers your second question:

2. When modelling the conditional mean of the series the classic approach would be to integrate the series. Is
there a similar approach considerable for the volatility?

Sorry for being a bit vague about the choice of the model, but I think it would be careless to recommend a particular model
just by having seen a graph of the data.

I would be also very happy about any hint to a particular Stata or R command that seem promising to model the
volatility of this time series.

In R I may recommend using "rugarch" package with main functions ugarchspec (for specifying a GARCH model) and
ugarchfit (for estimating the specified model for a given data series). There is a nice vignette to consult.

P.S.

the estimated coefficients sum to a value greater than one <...> implying that volatility is growing without bounds
which is clearly undesirable

It is not only undesirable, but it also does not seem to fit the data -- I do not see gradually exploding volatility in the second
By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.
figure.
 answered Jun 16 '15 at 13:34
Richard Hardy
42.5k 9 68 183

Thank you Richard for your very helpful comments. I edited my post to incorporate your critic corncerning the details on the data and the
time series behavior of volatility. I was also doing some research in the meantime and conducted some simulations. It seems to me that the
number of observations (534) might even be too low to fit any meaningful GARCH model. – Roberto Liebscher Jun 17 '15 at 14:34

534 observations do not sound too bad. Also, why an AR(1) model for fixed income total return index? Is that a standard practice to assume
an AR(1) model for such series? – Richard Hardy Jun 17 '15 at 15:29

Not so sure whether it's standard practice. I tried different ARMA specifications and judged the results using the common information
criteria (BIC, AIC, SIC) and they pointed at the AR(1) which is also supported by the partial autocorrelation function. Fitting models of higher
order basically results in all coefficients being insignificant. – Roberto Liebscher Jun 18 '15 at 6:02

I see. I thought maybe ARMA may not be suitable in general, whatever the order (p, q ) – but such judgement requires subject matter
knowledge. – Richard Hardy Jun 20 '15 at 12:48

By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, and our Terms of Service.