Flexible Term Structure Estimation: Which Method is Preferred?

Oliver Linton, Andrew Jeffrey and Thong Nguyen

FMG Discussion Papers from Financial Markets Group

Abstract: We show the recently developed nonparametric procedure for fitting the term structure interest rates developed by Linton, Mammen, Nielsen, and Tanggaard (2000) overall performs notably better than the highly felxible McCulloch (1975) cubic spline and Fama and Bliss (1987) bootstrap methods. However if interest is limited to the Treasury bill region alone then the Fama-Bliss method demonstrates superior performance. We show, via simulation, that using the estimated short rate from the Linton-Mammen-Nielsen-Tanggaard procedure as a proxy for the short rate has higher precision than the commonly used proxies of the one and three month Treasury bill rates. It is demonstrated that this precision is important when using proxies to estimate the stochastic process governing the evolution of the short rate.

Date: 2001-07
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.lse.ac.uk/fmg/workingPapers/discussionPapers/fmg_pdfs/dp385.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Flexible Term Structure Estimation: Which Method is Preferred? (2006)
Working Paper: Flexible term structure estimation: which method is preferred? (2001)
Working Paper: Flexible Term Structure Estimation: Which Method Is Preferred? (2001)
Working Paper: Flexible Term Structure Estimation: Which Method Is Preferred? (2001)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:fmg:fmgdps:dp385

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in FMG Discussion Papers from Financial Markets Group
Bibliographic data for series maintained by The FMG Administration ().