 VOLATILITY FORECASTS, TRADING VOLUME, AND THE ARCH VERSUS OPTION‐IMPLIED VOLATILITY TRADE‐OFFR. Glen Donaldson and Mark Kamstra () Journal of Financial Research, 2005, vol. 28, issue 4, 519-538 Abstract: We investigate empirically the role of trading volume (1) in predicting the relative informativeness of volatility forecasts produced by autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) models versus the volatility forecasts derived from option prices, and (2) in improving volatility forecasts produced by ARCH and option models and combinations of models. Daily and monthly data are explored. We find that if trading volume was low during period t−1 relative to the recent past, ARCH is at least as important as options for forecasting future stock market volatility. Conversely, if volume was high during period t−1 relative to the recent past, option‐implied volatility is much more important than ARCH for forecasting future volatility. Considering relative trading volume as a proxy for changes in the set of information available to investors, our findings reveal an important switching role for trading volume between a volatility forecast that reflects relatively stale information (the historical ARCH estimate) and the option‐implied forward‐looking estimate. Date: 2005 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jfnres:v:28:y:2005:i:4:p:519-538 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from Access Statistics for this article Journal of Financial Research is currently edited by Jayant Kale and Gerald Gay More articles in Journal of Financial Research from Southern Finance Association Contact information at EDIRC., Southwestern Finance Association Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.