In the present case, the selection of the smoothing constant for a nondaily series will be based on a time domain methodology that produces an equivalent constant, in the sense of producing the same percentage of smoothness as that obtained with a daily series. We start by considering the type of aggregation that links a lower-frequency series with a higher-frequency series {Yt}. The aggregation is assumed to be linear, that is
k
YT∗ = cjYk(T−1)+j for T =1,...,n (19) j=1
with n=N/k, where x denotes the integer part of a real number x, and k is the number of observations Yt between two successive observations YT∗. The cjs are constants that define the type of aggregation, e.g. c1=···=ck =1 are used to aggregate a flow series and c1=···=ck =1/k are used when working with an index or an annualized flow series (which is also considered a flow series). When working with a series of stocks, the aggregated series is generated by systematic sampling. In that case the usual values are c1=1, c2=···=ck =0 or c1=···=ck−1=0, ck =1.
Without loss of generality, in what follows we shall assume that c1=···=ck =1 for a flow series and c1=···=ck−1=0, ck =1 for a series of stocks. Thus, let T and t be the time sub-index for the aggregated and disaggregated series, respectively, then we have
Y, j =0,1,...,T −1 (20) for stocks
The model to be applied to the aggregated data preserves the form (12)–(13), in particular the order of integration (as shown by Brewer [17]), that is,
Y∗ =s∗+g∗ with E(g∗)=0, Var(g∗)=∗2In (21)
K1ns∗ =e∗ with E (22)
and E 0, where ∗ is used to denote aggregated variables. As with (15), the trend estimator is given by
sˆ∗ 1∗− 2Y∗ (23)
Even though expressions (15) and (23) are of the same form, the resulting trends are different. In fact, aggregating the trend estimated from the disaggregated series will produce different values than those of the estimated trend obtained directly from the aggregated series. Nevertheless, we show below that it is possible to find a smoothing constant for a disaggregated series that is equivalent to the ∗k value for the aggregated data, in the sense of producing the same percentage of smoothness.
From Equations (21)–(22) it follows that
∗∗T (24)
where ∇∗ is the difference operator for the aggregated series, so that is represented by an IMA(1,1), i.e. an Integrated Moving Average model of order (1,1) whose variance ∗0 and autocovariance ∗1 are given by
∗2 and ∗1=−∗2 (25)
Similarly, from Equations (12)–(13) we know that the disaggregated series follows the IMA(1,1) model t with variance and covariance 1=−2. To see how the two IMA=(1+,1)+···+models relate to each other, let us first consider a flow series, i.e. letk−1. Since Sk∇ we have YT∗−so thatj =SkY∇t−kjkSkwithYt =
SSk T =∇ t we get
kt for flows (26)
Now, for a stock series we know that Y −j t jk andkYt so that the previous derivation leads us to
kt for stocks (27)
Therefore, the autocovariance generating function (AGF) of the disaggregated series, (B)= j Bj, is given by
(28) for stocks
Уважаемый посетитель!
Чтобы распечатать файл, скачайте его (в формате Word).
Ссылка на скачивание - внизу страницы.