8
$\begingroup$

I'm quite newbie to time series analysis and I have to understand what's the difference between differencing time series (i.e considering $Y_t= X_t-X_{t-1}$) and detrending (using linear regression for example) the series to make a time series stationary. I've read in my book that these are two diffent approaches but I don't understand which is better in which context.

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Hi: It depends on what the DGP of the original process is. Is the process trend stationary or difference stationary ? If it's trend stationary then de-trending is the way to go. If it's difference stationary, then differencing is the way to go.

The two models are quite different:

Trend Stationary: $y_t = \beta_{0} + \beta_1 \times t + \epsilon_t$

Difference Stationary:

$y_t = u_{t} + \epsilon_t $
$u_t = u_{t-1} + \omega_t$

In the early 1980's, Nelson and Plosser (link to paper below) found that a lot of econometric series that were though to be trend-stationary were actually difference stationary and this caused an explosion of research on the question of difference versus trend stationary.

http://schwert.ssb.rochester.edu/a425/jme82_NP.pdf

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, maybe i get it. But from a statistic point of view, how I can distinguish the real DGP? I'm trying to model netflix (NFLX) Adjusted Close Price and related log-return but I really can't find it. $\endgroup$ – perseo Dec 24 '19 at 18:26
  • $\begingroup$ More details: I was trying to model the time series with an ARIMA(p,1,q)+GARCH(m,n) in R but i got no stable model for the ARIMA part; in fact i got many NAs in fitted value, probably because of Hessian troubles. Now i just de-trended the ts with a simple linear model and I got an AR(1). I guess ADF test can relate but i can't understand how to distinguish the two models. $\endgroup$ – perseo Dec 24 '19 at 18:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ There are tests that can be used but your project sounds large. If your trying to model Netflix, I would use returns rather than prices. That might get rid of a lot of the non-stationarity, be it trend or difference. See how that goes because using prices for prediction is not a good idea. Prices are EXTREMELY non-stationary. Returns might be but not as much. I would also do things in steps. Don't just fit arima-garch. Try to see what kind of arima model looks reasonable and then worry about adding garch in after that. $\endgroup$ – mark leeds Dec 24 '19 at 20:22
2
$\begingroup$

Let me try to write formulae to explain the differences:

  • When $X_t=a+b\,t + c\,\xi_t$, where $\xi_t$ is an iid centered and reduced noise (ie $\mathbb{E}\xi=0$ and $\mathbb{E}\xi^2=1$.

With $X_(t+1)-X_t=b + c\Delta\xi$, you read that you increased the amplitude of the noise $\xi$ by a factor $\sqrt{2}$, you removed $a$ and you have no more time dependent.

  • When $X_t=a+b\,t + c\,W_t$ where $W$ is a Wiener process, ie $dX=b\, dt + c\, dW$ and $dW\sim {\cal N}(0,1)$.

Here it is more natural to immediately look at $dX$: you removed the constant, and this time you reduced the amplitude of the noise. Moreover, since $\mathbb{E}W_t^2=t$ you removed the heteroskedasticity of the process (see Bollerslev's papers).

For stock returns, just take $dX=\frac{dP}{P}$ and you are closer to the second case. If you consider daily prices, we know the model should be more sophisticated:

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.