Volatility Forecasting via MIDAS, HAR and their Combination: An Empirical Comparative Study for IBOVESPA

In this paper we compare several multi‐period volatility forecasting models, specifically from MIDAS and HAR families. We perform our comparisons in terms of out‐of‐sample volatility forecasting accuracy. We also consider combinations of the models' forecasts. Using intra‐daily returns of the BOVESPA index, we calculate volatility measures such as realized variance, realized power variation and realized bipower variation to be used as regressors in both models. Further, we use a nonparametric procedure for separately measuring the continuous sample path variation and the discontinuous jump part of the quadratic variation process. Thus MIDAS and HAR specifications with the continuous sample path and jump variability measures as separate regressors are estimated. Our results in terms of mean squared error suggest that regressors involving volatility measures which are robust to jumps (i.e. realized bipower variation and realized power variation) are better at forecasting future volatility. However, we find that, in general, the forecasts based on these regressors are not statistically different from those based on realized variance (the benchmark regressor). Moreover, we find that, in general, the relative forecasting performances of the three approaches (i.e. MIDAS, HAR and forecast combinations) are statistically equivalent.