Are regression approach futures hedge ratios stationary?
Robert Ferguson and
Journal of Futures Markets, 1998, vol. 18, issue 7, 851-866
In contrast to some recent research, this article finds that regression approach futures hedge ratios are stationary. It shows that a previous study's failure to reject the random walk null hypothesis was due to its small sample size and the overlapping hedge ratio calculation approach's bias toward accepting the random walk hypothesis. The impact of overlap on the Dickey‐Fuller full model intercept and slope estimates is demonstrated analytically and numerically. Finally, the article shows that out‐of‐sample hedging performance is not significantly improved by updating the hedge ratios. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 18:851–866, 1998
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jfutmk:v:18:y:1998:i:7:p:851-866
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0270-7314
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Futures Markets is currently edited by Robert I. Webb
More articles in Journal of Futures Markets from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().