Premium
Methods for backcasting, nowcasting and forecasting using factor‐MIDAS: With an application to Korean GDP
Author(s) -
Kim Hyun Hak,
Swanson Norman R.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of forecasting
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.543
H-Index - 59
eISSN - 1099-131X
pISSN - 0277-6693
DOI - 10.1002/for.2499
Subject(s) - nowcasting , backcasting , econometrics , computer science , autoregressive model , benchmark (surveying) , factor analysis , interpolation (computer graphics) , predictive modelling , economics , machine learning , artificial intelligence , geography , meteorology , ecology , sustainability , biology , motion (physics) , geodesy
We utilize mixed‐frequency factor‐MIDAS models for the purpose of carrying out backcasting, nowcasting, and forecasting experiments using real‐time data. We also introduce a new real‐time Korean GDP dataset, which is the focus of our experiments. The methodology that we utilize involves first estimating common latent factors (i.e., diffusion indices) from 190 monthly macroeconomic and financial series using various estimation strategies. These factors are then included, along with standard variables measured at multiple different frequencies, in various factor‐MIDAS prediction models. Our key empirical findings as follows. (i) When using real‐time data, factor‐MIDAS prediction models outperform various linear benchmark models. Interestingly, the “MSFE‐best” MIDAS models contain no autoregressive (AR) lag terms when backcasting and nowcasting. AR terms only begin to play a role in “true” forecasting contexts. (ii) Models that utilize only one or two factors are “MSFE‐best” at all forecasting horizons, but not at any backcasting and nowcasting horizons. In these latter contexts, much more heavily parametrized models with many factors are preferred. (iii) Real‐time data are crucial for forecasting Korean gross domestic product, and the use of “first available” versus “most recent” data “strongly” affects model selection and performance. (iv) Recursively estimated models are almost always “MSFE‐best,” and models estimated using autoregressive interpolation dominate those estimated using other interpolation methods. (v) Factors estimated using recursive principal component estimation methods have more predictive content than those estimated using a variety of other (more sophisticated) approaches. This result is particularly prevalent for our “MSFE‐best” factor‐MIDAS models, across virtually all forecast horizons, estimation schemes, and data vintages that are analyzed.