Knowing factors or factor loadings, or neither? Evaluating estimators of large covariance matrices with noisy and asynchronous data
已知因子、已知载荷或均未知:含噪异步数据下大型协方差估计量的比较AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要结合含噪异步金融高频数据、因子模型及大型协方差矩阵估计,并以样本外组合配置评估。
已知因子、已知载荷或均未知:含噪异步数据下大型协方差估计量的比较AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We investigate estimators of factor-model-based large covariance (and precision) matrices using high-frequency data, which are asynchronous and potentially contaminated by the market microstructure noise. Our estimation strategies rely on the pre-averaging method with refresh time to solve the microstructure problems, while using three different specifications of factor models with a variety of thresholding methods, respectively, to battle the curse of dimensionality. To estimate a factor model, we either adopt the time-series regression (TSR) to recover loadings if factors are known, or use the cross-sectional regression (CSR) to recover factors from known loadings, or use the principal component analysis (PCA) if neither factors nor their loadings are assumed known. We compare the convergence rates in these scenarios using the joint in-fill and increasing dimensionality asymptotics. To evaluate the empirical trade-off between robustness to model misspecification and statistical efficiency among all 30 combinations of estimation strategies, we run a horse race on the out-of-sample portfolio allocation with Dow Jones 30, S&P 100, and S&P 500 index constituents, respectively, and find the pre-averaging-based strategy using TSR or PCA with location thresholding dominates, especially over the subsampling-based alternatives.