Testing for One-Factor Models versus Stochastic Volatility Models



The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, the testing procedure is outlined
and the relevant limit theory is derived. Section 3 reports the findings from a Monte Carlo exercise,
in order to assess the finite sample behavior of the proposed tests. Concluding remarks are given
in Section 4. All the proof are gathered in the Appendix.

In this paper, -p, -d and -a.s. denote respectively convergence in probability, in distribution
and almost sure convergence. We write 1
1. for the indicator function, |_wJ for the integer part of
w, I j for the identity matrix of dimension J and Z ~ MN (, ) to denote that the random variable
Z is distributed as a mixed normal.

2 Testing for One-Factor vs Stochastic Volatility Models

2.1 Set-Up

As discussed above, our objective is to device a data driven procedure for deciding between one-
factor diffusion models and stochastic volatility models, under minimal assumptions.

We consider the following class of one-factor diffusion models

d Xt = μ ( Xt )d t + σt d W1 ,t

σt = σ (Xt)                                              (1)

and the following class of stochastic volatility models

d Xt = μ ( Xt )d t + σt d W1 ,t
σt2 = g(ft)

dft = b(ft)dt+σ1(ft)dW2,t,                                 (2)

where ft is typically an unobservable state variable driven by a Brownian motion, W2,t, possibly but
not perfectly correlated with the Brownian motion driving
Xt , thus allowing for possible leverage
effects.

The models in (1) encompass the class of parametric specifications analyzed by Alt-Sahalia
(1996), and they also allows for generic nonlinearities. The models in (2) include the square root
stochastic volatility of Heston (1993), the Garch diffusion model (Nelson, 1990), the lognormal
stochastic volatility model of Hull and White (1987) and Wiggins (1987), and are also related to
the class of eigenfuction stochastic volatility models of Meddahi (2001). Note that
ft may be a
multidimensional process, thus allowing for multifactor stochastic volatility processes. Also, the
one-factor model may be possibly nested within the stochastic volatility model, in the sense that we
can allow for the specification
σt2 = σ2 (Xt) g(ft). Andersen and Lund (1997) and Durham (2003)



More intriguing information

1. Gender and headship in the twenty-first century
2. THE USE OF EXTRANEOUS INFORMATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A POLICY SIMULATION MODEL
3. Forecasting Financial Crises and Contagion in Asia using Dynamic Factor Analysis
4. The demand for urban transport: An application of discrete choice model for Cadiz
5. Distribution of aggregate income in Portugal from 1995 to 2000 within a SAM (Social Accounting Matrix) framework. Modeling the household sector
6. The name is absent
7. The name is absent
8. An Interview with Thomas J. Sargent
9. Novelty and Reinforcement Learning in the Value System of Developmental Robots
10. The name is absent