Why This Matters
Time series models form the backbone of forecasting and dynamic analysis in quantitative methodsโand you're being tested on your ability to choose the right model for the right situation. Whether you're predicting stock prices, analyzing economic indicators, or modeling climate patterns, understanding stationarity requirements, volatility dynamics, and multivariate relationships separates surface-level knowledge from genuine analytical skill.
Don't just memorize model acronyms and their parameters. Know why each model exists, what data characteristics it addresses, and when to deploy it over alternatives. Exam questions will ask you to identify appropriate models given specific data features, interpret parameter meanings, and explain the theoretical foundations that make each approach valid.
Foundational Univariate Models
These models capture temporal dependence in a single variable using either past values, past errors, or both. The key distinction lies in whether the model looks backward at the variable itself or at the mistakes made in predicting it.
Autoregressive (AR) Models
- Past values drive predictionsโthe model uses p lagged observations of the variable itself to forecast future values
- Coefficients measure persistenceโeach ฯiโ parameter quantifies how strongly value tโi influences the current observation
- Stationarity requiredโAR models assume the underlying process has constant mean and variance over time
Moving Average (MA) Models
- Past forecast errors drive predictionsโthe model uses q lagged error terms (shocks) rather than the variable's own history
- Captures short-term dynamicsโMA models excel at modeling temporary fluctuations that dissipate quickly
- Invertibility conditionโfor valid estimation, MA coefficients must satisfy constraints ensuring the process can be expressed in AR form
Autoregressive Moving Average (ARMA) Models
- Combines AR and MA componentsโuses both p past values and q past errors for more flexible modeling
- Parsimony advantageโoften achieves better fit with fewer parameters than pure AR or MA specifications
- Stationary data onlyโARMA assumes no trends, no unit roots, and no seasonal patterns in the series
Compare: AR(1) vs. MA(1)โboth model simple dependence structures, but AR captures persistent effects that decay gradually while MA captures transient shocks that vanish after one period. If an exam asks about modeling a variable with long memory, AR is your answer.
Handling Non-Stationarity
Real-world data rarely stays put. These models address trends, unit roots, and deterministic drift that violate the assumptions of basic ARMA frameworks.
Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) Models
- Differencing creates stationarityโthe d parameter specifies how many times to difference the series before applying ARMA
- Notation ARIMA(p,d,q)โcombines autoregressive order, integration order, and moving average order in one framework
- Most common specificationโARIMA(1,1,1) handles many economic series with a single difference and simple dynamics
Seasonal ARIMA (SARIMA) Models
- Adds seasonal differencing and lagsโparameters (P,D,Q)sโ capture patterns repeating every s periods
- Full notation SARIMA(p,d,q)(P,D,Q)sโโseparates non-seasonal and seasonal components explicitly
- Essential for periodic dataโquarterly GDP, monthly retail sales, and daily temperature all exhibit predictable seasonal swings
Compare: ARIMA vs. SARIMAโboth handle non-stationarity through differencing, but ARIMA addresses trend non-stationarity while SARIMA additionally captures seasonal non-stationarity. When data shows both upward drift and repeating annual patterns, you need SARIMA.
Modeling Volatility Dynamics
Financial returns often exhibit volatility clusteringโperiods of high variance followed by more high variance. These models treat variance itself as a time-varying process.
Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity (GARCH) Models
- Variance depends on past variance and past shocksโฯt2โ=ฯ+ฮฑฯตtโ12โ+ฮฒฯtโ12โ in the standard GARCH(1,1)
- Captures volatility clusteringโlarge price movements tend to follow large movements, which GARCH models explicitly
- Foundation for risk managementโValue-at-Risk calculations and option pricing rely heavily on GARCH-based volatility forecasts
Exponential Smoothing Models
- Weighted averages with exponential decayโrecent observations receive more weight than distant ones via smoothing parameter ฮฑ
- Holt-Winters extends to trends and seasonsโadditive or multiplicative components handle level, slope, and periodic patterns
- Computationally simpleโno likelihood estimation required, making these models fast benchmarks for forecasting competitions
Compare: GARCH vs. Exponential Smoothingโboth apply decaying weights to past information, but GARCH models the variance process while Exponential Smoothing models the level process. GARCH answers "how volatile will tomorrow be?" while Holt-Winters answers "what value will we observe?"
Multivariate and Regime-Based Models
When multiple variables interact or when the underlying data-generating process shifts over time, these advanced frameworks become necessary.
Vector Autoregression (VAR) Models
- All variables are endogenousโeach series is regressed on its own lags and the lags of every other variable in the system
- Granger causality testingโVAR enables formal tests of whether one variable's past helps predict another
- Impulse response functionsโtrace how a shock to one variable propagates through the system over time
State Space Models
- Separates observed from unobserved componentsโmeasurement equation links data to latent states; state equation governs state evolution
- Kalman filter estimationโrecursive algorithm updates state estimates as new observations arrive
- Handles missing data and irregular timingโthe framework naturally accommodates gaps and uneven sampling intervals
Markov Switching Models
- Regime-dependent parametersโmodel coefficients change based on an unobserved discrete state variable
- Transition probabilities govern switchingโthe probability of moving between regimes follows a Markov chain
- Captures structural breaks endogenouslyโrather than imposing break dates, the model infers when shifts occurred
Compare: VAR vs. State Spaceโboth handle multivariate dynamics, but VAR treats all variables as directly observed while State Space allows for latent factors driving the data. If you suspect unobserved components like "true inflation" versus measured CPI, State Space is appropriate.
Quick Reference Table
|
| Modeling persistence in levels | AR, ARMA, VAR |
| Modeling transient shocks | MA, ARMA |
| Handling trend non-stationarity | ARIMA, Exponential Smoothing |
| Handling seasonal patterns | SARIMA, Holt-Winters |
| Time-varying volatility | GARCH |
| Multivariate interdependence | VAR, State Space |
| Unobserved components | State Space, Markov Switching |
| Structural breaks and regime shifts | Markov Switching |
Self-Check Questions
-
Which two models both use differencing to achieve stationarity, and what distinguishes the type of non-stationarity each addresses?
-
You observe that large forecast errors in a financial return series tend to cluster together. Which model family is designed for this phenomenon, and what is the key equation governing variance dynamics?
-
Compare and contrast VAR and State Space models: under what data conditions would you choose one over the other?
-
An FRQ presents quarterly retail sales data with both upward trend and repeating December spikes. Write the general notation for the appropriate model and explain what each parameter group captures.
-
A researcher suspects that interest rate dynamics fundamentally changed after a financial crisis but doesn't know exactly when. Which model allows the data to identify regime shifts endogenously, and what probabilistic structure governs transitions between states?