Common Trend Models for Time Series Jee-Kwang Park Post-Doctoral Fellow in QuaSSI Department of...
Transcript of Common Trend Models for Time Series Jee-Kwang Park Post-Doctoral Fellow in QuaSSI Department of...
Common Trend Modelsfor
Time Series
Jee-Kwang Park
Post-Doctoral Fellow in QuaSSIDepartment of Political SciencePennsylvania State University
2
Factor Analysis
• The object of interest is not directly observable (measurable)
• But other seemingly related quantities are measurable
• Factor analysis explain the correlations between measurable variables in terms of underlying factors, which are not directly measurable.
3
Factor Analysis
• Ex) Mathematical abilities among students Geometry Algebra Calculus
1 68 76 70
2 90 94 94
3 86 80 78
4 88
subject
88 86
5 60 64 66
L
4
Common trend Models(Dynamic Factor Analysis)
• Estimate the underlying common trends among a group of time series.
• Do factor analysis with time series• Estimate the factor loadings and predict
factor scores• Business cycle, interest rates, stock prices• Three variants: DFA, TSFA, SSM
5
Common Trend Model
Ex) Series 1 Series 2 Series 3
1 134.5 123.3 122.3
2 135.7 134.5 128.7
3 137.5 145.9 131.1
4 140.8 159.0
Time
153.5
5 141.9 165.6 153.7
L
6
1) Dynamic Factor Analysis
• Geweke (1977) first proposes the dynamic factor analysis
• S-Plus/Finmetrics Program• DFA estimates the dynamics of the factors• Limit: valid with stationary series • most social science data are nonstationary
7
Model Specification of DFA
( 1)( 1) ( 1) 1
2i
2 2
1
2
1
cov( , ) 0, for all t,s
( ) ( ) 0
var( ) ,var( ) ,
is a diagonal matrix with .
var( ) ,
the variance due to the common
t t tN KNN K N
t s
t t
t K t
K
it ij ij
K
ijj
Y f
f
E f E
f I D
Where D
Y
where
m b e
e
e
e
s
b s
b
´´´ ´ ´
=
=
= + +
=
= =
= =
= +
=
å
å
2
factors
=communality
the variance due to specific to each series = uniquenessis =
8
Time Series Factor Analysis (TSFA)
• Gilbert and Meijer (2005)
• P-technique factor analysis (Cattell et al)
• works with nonstationary (weak bounded condition)
• MLE, estimate is unbiased and consistent• Errors are not assumed to be iid• R package (tsfa)
9
State Space Model of Common Trends (SSM)
• Engle and Watson(1981, 1983), Molenaar (1985), Harvey (1989), Lütkepohl(1991), Zuur (2003)
• Works with nonstationary and short time series
• can include explanatory variables• most widely used• Ox/STAMP
10
SSM Model Specification
'
' ' ' '1
'
time series & K common trends
, ~ (0, )
, ~ (0,D )
1,
of standardized factor loadings
D a diagonal matrix
is an 1 vector
in which the first element
t t t t
t t t t
t
N
y NID
NID
K
N K
N
N K
q e
q
m m e e
m m h h
h
m
-
= Q + +
= +
= ´
Q = ´
=
´
-
å
s are zeros
and the last elements are contained in a vector .K m
11
Presidential Approval
• 6 series : Gallup, ABC/WP, CBS/NYT, Fox, Pew, Zogby
• Sources : www.pollingreport.com and roper center webpage
• Monthly Presidential Approval Series
• plural polls in a month, especially Gallup.• Averaging the plural polls is not so a good idea.• Cluster of polls, sample size
12
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
40
50
60
70
80
90 Gallup CBS/NYT Pew
ABC Fox Reuters/Zogby
13
Presidential Approval
• Missing Data• all polls but Gallup have missing months• (Cubic) spline smooth interpolation (Zivot &
Wang 2002)• Spline ? nonparametric regression like L
oess• Gallup = 0, Fox = 1, CBS/NYT = 4, ABC/W
P = 9, Pew = 9, Zogby =12 missing observations
14
Presidential Approval
• Previous Studies
• Beck, (2006), Franklin (2006), Chung(2006)…
• Franklin shows interesting findings on the house effects
• CBS polls tend to fall 3% below the overall trend in 2005-2006: 38.2% 38.6%
• Robert Chung’s finding : CBS polls have a small positive house effect during the pre-2005 period.
• Autocorrelation (serial correlation)
15
Franklin (2006)
16
Presidential Approval (DFA)• Using Finmetrics (S-Plus)• Wald test shows one common factor
> factor.fit <- factanal(Bush.multiple, factors=1, method="mle") > factor.fit Sums of squares of loadings: Factor1 5.816041 …
Test of the hypothesis that 1 factor is sufficientversus the alternative that more are required:The chi square statistic is 9.79 on 9 degrees of freedom.The p-value is 0.367
17
Presidential Approval (DFA)• 97% of variance is explained by one common factor > summary(factor.fit)
Importance of factors: Factor1 SS loadings 5.8160408
Proportion Var 0.9693401Cumulative Var 0.9693401
• Variance unique to each series
The degrees of freedom for the model is 9.Uniquenesses: Gallup ABC/WP CBS Fox Pew Zogby 0.021 0.015 0.037 0.025 0.040 0.042
18
Presidential Approval (DFA)
• Correlation among the polls
> fitted(factor.fit) Gallup ABC CBS Fox Pew ZogbyGallup 1.000 0.981 0.970 0.976 0.968 0.967ABC 0.981 0.999 0.973 0.979 0.971 0.970CBS 0.970 0.973 0.999 0.968 0.961 0.960Fox 0.976 0.979 0.968 0.999 0.966 0.965Pew 0.968 0.971 0.961 0.966 0.999 0.958Zogby 0.967 0.970 0.960 0.965 0.958 0.999
19
Presidential Approval (SSM)
• The phenomenon conjectured by Franklin(2006) is supported by the residual plot
• The same phenomenon is also visible in other polls
20
2005
50
75
100Gallup Trend_Gallup
2005
-5
0
5 Irr_Gallup
2005
50
75
100ABC Trend_ABC
2005
0
10 Irr_ABC
2005
50
75
100CBS/NYT Trend_CBS/NYT
2005
-10
0
10 Irr_CBS/NYT
2005
40
60
80Fox Trend_Fox
2005
0
10
20 Irr_Fox
2005
40
60
80Pew Trend_Pew
2005
0
10
20 Irr_Pew
2005
40
60
80Reuters/Zogby Trend_Reuters/Zogby
2005
-10
0
10 Irr_Reuters/Zogby
21
Presidential Approval (SSM)
• Strength of SSM- We can compare a value in one series with one in another series
due to following properties of SSM
- 55% approval rate in Gallup is tantamount to 56.226% in ABC/WP poll.
- ABC = .775*Gallup + 13.601+ error
'1 1
'2 2 2 2
'
2 2 1 2
where is a univariate random walk. Thus we have
t t t
t t t
t
t t
y
y c
c
m e
bm e
m
m bm
= +
= + +
= +
22
Tariff Rates (DFA)
• Tariff rates of 5 Latin American Countries
• Missing observations
• Two common factors• 80 % of variance is explained by 2
factors
23
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Venezuela Mexico Argentina
Peru Brazil
24
Venezuela Mexico Brazil Argentina Peru
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Factor1
Peru Brazil Argentina Venezuela Mexico
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Factor2
25
10 20
-10
12
3
26
Average Tariff Rates (SSM)
• Two Common trends
• Brazil seems to be best explained by the two common factors
• Argentina is the worst fit, which means its tariff rates seem to be more influenced by domestic variables compared to the others.
• The series co-moved more tightly in the second half of the period.
27
1980 1990 2000
25
50
75 Venezuela Trend_Venezuela
1980 1990 2000
-5
0
5
10 Irr_Venezuela
1980 1990 2000
20
40Peru Trend_Peru
1980 1990 2000
0.0
2.5
5.0 Irr_Peru
1980 1990 2000
10
20
30Mexico Trend_Mexico
1980 1990 2000
-5
0
5 Irr_Mexico
1980 1990 2000
20
40
60Brazil Trend_Brazil
1980 1990 2000
-2
0
2 Irr_Brazil
1980 1990 2000
20
40
60Argentina Trend_Argentina
1980 1990 2000
-10
0
10
20 Irr_Argentina
28
Conclusion
• Common trends model will be useful- We have reason to believe multiple time series are influenced by the
common factor(s)- The common factor cannot be directly measurable- We are interested in measuring the amount of the variances specific
to each series- Another Application: asset returns model