Editorial for Applied Econometrics

This Editorial evaluates 14 invaluable and interesting articles in the Special Issue “Applied Econometrics” for the Journal of Risk and Financial Management (JRFM). The topics covered include recovering historical inflation data from postage stamps prices, FHA loans in foreclosure proceedings through distinguishing sources of interdependence in competing risks, information in earnings forecasts, nonlinear time series modeling, a systemic approach to management control through determining factors, economic freedom and FDI versus economic growth, efficient cash use of the Taiwan dollar, financial health prediction in companies from post-Communist countries, influence of misery index on U.S. Presidential political elections, multivariate student versus Gaussian regression models in finance, financial derivatives markets and economic development, income inequality and economic growth in middle-income countries, abnormal returns, mis-measured risk, network effects, and risk spillovers in stock returns.

Economics is whatever the comparative advantage of economists is: a comment on Leeson (2020)

Leeson (2020) objects to the conflation of economics with applied econometrics, and argues that economics instead should be thought of as the implications of the assumption that individuals maximize, i.e. rational choice theory. But, narrowly defining economics in terms of method demands that we ignore alternative theoretical frameworks which potentially hold explanatory power about topics thought of as economics, all for the sake of a definition. I suggest that applying rational choice theory and applying econometrics became the comparative advantage for economists relative to other social scientists by accidents of history. These comparative advantages largely persist. It is reasonable to call applications of both rational choice theory and econometrics to topics outside conventional economic topics ‘economics’ simply because these applications remain the comparative advantage of economists.

Essays on banking valuation

Η παρούσα διδακτορική διατριβή αφορά την αποτίμηση της αξίας των τραπεζών μέσω των ιδίων κεφαλαίων τους. Συγκεκριμένα, χρησιμοποιείται ο δείκτης Price-to-Book (PB) των τραπεζών, ήτοι ο λόγος της αγοραίας αξίας των ιδίων κεφαλαίων προς την λογιστική αξίων των ιδίων κεφαλαίων. Αποπειράται η υποδειγματοποίηση του δείκτη ΡΒ βάσει της θεμελιώδους αποτίμησης της αξίας των επιχειρήσεων με σύγχρονα οικονομετρικά εργαλεία. Θεμελιώνεται το 3D υπόδειγμα αποτίμησης ιδίων κεφαλαίων των τραπεζών των Μπερτσάτου και Σακελλάρη (2016, Economics Letters). Δίδεται έμφαση στην έννοια της συνολοκλήρωσης και στα αυτοπαλίνδρομα υποδείγματα διόρθωσης σφάλματος, όπου εκτιμώνται τόσο οι μακροχρόνιοι όσο και οι βραχυχρόνιοι συντελεστές. Παράλληλα, επεκτείνεται το υπόδειγμα 3D τόσο ως προς το δείγμα εφαρμογής και την εξειδίκευσή του όσο ως και προς τις τεχνικές εκτίμησής του. Τέλος, παρουσιάζεται μία σειρά από επεκτάσεις της ευρέως χρησιμοποιούμενης τεχνικής στατιστικών ορίων ελέγχου των Pesaran, Shin and Smith (2001, Journal of Applied Econometrics) τόσο σε επίπεδο χρονοσειρών όσο και σε επίπεδο δεδομένων πάνελ.

A wavelet-based variance ratio unit root test for a system of equations

In this paper, we suggest a unit root test for a system of equations using a spectral variance decomposition method based on the Maximal Overlap Discrete Wavelet Transform. We obtain the limiting distribution of the test statistic and study its small sample properties using Monte Carlo simulations. We find that, for multiple time series of small lengths, the wavelet-based method is robust to size distortions in the presence of cross-sectional dependence. The wavelet-based test is also more powerful than the Cross-sectionally Augmented Im et al. unit root test (Pesaran, M. H. 2007. “A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross-section Dependence.” Journal of Applied Econometrics 22 (2): 265–312.) for time series with between 20 and 100 observations, using systems of 5 and 10 equations. We demonstrate the usefulness of the test through an application on evaluating the Purchasing Power Parity theory for the Group of 7 countries and find support for the theory, whereas the test by Pesaran (Pesaran, M. H. 2007. “A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross-section Dependence.” Journal of Applied Econometrics 22 (2): 265–312.) finds no such support.