1 00:00:00,060 --> 00:00:02,500 The following content is provided under a Creative 2 00:00:02,500 --> 00:00:04,019 Commons license. 3 00:00:04,019 --> 00:00:06,360 Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare 4 00:00:06,360 --> 00:00:10,730 continue to offer high quality educational resources for free. 5 00:00:10,730 --> 00:00:13,340 To make a donation or view additional materials 6 00:00:13,340 --> 00:00:17,217 from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare 7 00:00:17,217 --> 00:00:17,842 at ocw.mit.edu. 8 00:00:22,240 --> 00:00:25,970 PROFESSOR: Today's topic is factor modeling, 9 00:00:25,970 --> 00:00:32,420 and the subject here basically exploits multivariate analysis 10 00:00:32,420 --> 00:00:37,910 in statistics to financial markets where our concern is 11 00:00:37,910 --> 00:00:42,790 using factors to model returns and variances, 12 00:00:42,790 --> 00:00:44,900 covariances, correlations. 13 00:00:44,900 --> 00:00:48,970 And with these models, there are two basic cases. 14 00:00:48,970 --> 00:00:52,150 There's one where the factors are observable. 15 00:00:52,150 --> 00:00:55,150 Those can be macroeconomic factors. 16 00:00:55,150 --> 00:00:59,690 They can be fundamental factors on assets or securities 17 00:00:59,690 --> 00:01:03,070 that might explain returns and covariances. 18 00:01:03,070 --> 00:01:06,490 A second class of models is where these factors 19 00:01:06,490 --> 00:01:08,930 are hidden or latent. 20 00:01:08,930 --> 00:01:11,850 And statistical factor models are then 21 00:01:11,850 --> 00:01:15,240 used to specify these models. 22 00:01:15,240 --> 00:01:17,110 In particular, there are two methodologies. 23 00:01:17,110 --> 00:01:21,310 There's factor analysis and principal components analysis, 24 00:01:21,310 --> 00:01:24,930 which we'll get into some detail during the lecture. 25 00:01:24,930 --> 00:01:31,200 So let's proceed to talk about the setup for a linear factor 26 00:01:31,200 --> 00:01:33,410 model. 27 00:01:33,410 --> 00:01:38,540 We have m assets, or instruments, or indexes 28 00:01:38,540 --> 00:01:42,710 whose values correspond to a multivariate stochastic process 29 00:01:42,710 --> 00:01:44,030 we're modeling. 30 00:01:44,030 --> 00:01:47,530 And we have n time periods t. 31 00:01:47,530 --> 00:01:52,840 And with the factor model we model the t-th value 32 00:01:52,840 --> 00:01:58,140 for the i-th object-- whether it's a stock price, futures 33 00:01:58,140 --> 00:02:04,750 price, currency-- as a linear function of factors 34 00:02:04,750 --> 00:02:07,360 f_1 through f_k. 35 00:02:07,360 --> 00:02:10,690 So there's basically like a state-space model 36 00:02:10,690 --> 00:02:12,845 for the value of the stochastic process, 37 00:02:12,845 --> 00:02:16,020 as it depends on these underlying factors. 38 00:02:16,020 --> 00:02:20,080 And the dependence is given by coefficients beta_1 39 00:02:20,080 --> 00:02:27,600 through beta_k, which are depending upon i, the asset. 40 00:02:27,600 --> 00:02:31,730 So we allow each asset, say if we're thinking of stocks, 41 00:02:31,730 --> 00:02:34,770 to depend on factors in different ways. 42 00:02:34,770 --> 00:02:38,900 If a certain underlying factor changes in value, 43 00:02:38,900 --> 00:02:44,340 the beta corresponds to the impact of that underlying 44 00:02:44,340 --> 00:02:46,330 factor. 45 00:02:46,330 --> 00:02:49,440 So we have common factors. 46 00:02:52,080 --> 00:02:54,250 Now these common factors f, this is really 47 00:02:54,250 --> 00:02:58,150 going to be a nice model if the number of factors that we're 48 00:02:58,150 --> 00:03:01,300 using is relatively small. 49 00:03:01,300 --> 00:03:05,360 So the number k of common factors 50 00:03:05,360 --> 00:03:09,490 is generally very, very small relative to m. 51 00:03:09,490 --> 00:03:13,010 And if you think about modeling, say asset-- equity asset 52 00:03:13,010 --> 00:03:16,000 returns in a market, there can be hundreds and thousands 53 00:03:16,000 --> 00:03:17,570 of securities. 54 00:03:17,570 --> 00:03:22,530 And so in terms of modeling those returns and covariances, 55 00:03:22,530 --> 00:03:24,360 what we're trying to do is characterize 56 00:03:24,360 --> 00:03:28,230 those in terms of a modest number of underlying factors 57 00:03:28,230 --> 00:03:30,510 which simplifies the problem greatly. 58 00:03:33,450 --> 00:03:37,190 The vectors beta_i are termed the factor loadings 59 00:03:37,190 --> 00:03:38,610 of an asset. 60 00:03:38,610 --> 00:03:43,680 And the epsilon_(i,t)'s are a specific factor of asset i, 61 00:03:43,680 --> 00:03:44,470 period t. 62 00:03:44,470 --> 00:03:48,260 So in factor modeling, we talk about there 63 00:03:48,260 --> 00:03:53,340 being common factors affecting the dynamics of the system, 64 00:03:53,340 --> 00:03:59,210 and the factor associated with particular cases 65 00:03:59,210 --> 00:04:02,450 are the specific factors. 66 00:04:02,450 --> 00:04:05,120 So this setup is really very familiar. 67 00:04:05,120 --> 00:04:08,430 It just looks like a standard sort of regression type model 68 00:04:08,430 --> 00:04:11,240 that we've seen before. 69 00:04:11,240 --> 00:04:14,270 And so let's see how this can be set up 70 00:04:14,270 --> 00:04:18,100 as a set of cross-sectional regressions. 71 00:04:18,100 --> 00:04:25,870 So now we're going to fix the period t, the time t, 72 00:04:25,870 --> 00:04:31,040 and consider the m-variate x variable 73 00:04:31,040 --> 00:04:38,460 as satisfying a regression model with intercept given by alphas. 74 00:04:38,460 --> 00:04:43,140 And then the independent variables matrix 75 00:04:43,140 --> 00:04:48,710 is B, given by the coefficients of the factor loadings. 76 00:04:48,710 --> 00:04:54,210 And then we have the residuals epsilon_t for the m assets. 77 00:04:54,210 --> 00:04:57,640 So the cross-sectional terminology 78 00:04:57,640 --> 00:05:00,700 means we're fixing time and looking across all 79 00:05:00,700 --> 00:05:02,970 the assets for one fixed time. 80 00:05:02,970 --> 00:05:09,310 And we're trying to explain how, say, the returns of assets 81 00:05:09,310 --> 00:05:12,240 are varying depending upon the underlying factors. 82 00:05:12,240 --> 00:05:19,990 And so the-- well OK, what's random in this process? 83 00:05:19,990 --> 00:05:23,770 Well certainly the residual term is considered to be random. 84 00:05:23,770 --> 00:05:26,410 That's basically going to be assumed 85 00:05:26,410 --> 00:05:29,660 to be white noise with mean 0. 86 00:05:29,660 --> 00:05:35,490 There's going to be possibly a covariance matrix psi. 87 00:05:35,490 --> 00:05:38,010 And it's going to be uncorrelated 88 00:05:38,010 --> 00:05:41,860 across different time cross sections. 89 00:05:41,860 --> 00:05:44,550 Let's see if I can move the mouse, if this is what's 90 00:05:44,550 --> 00:05:46,700 causing the problem down here. 91 00:05:46,700 --> 00:05:54,450 So in this model we have the realizations on the underlying 92 00:05:54,450 --> 00:05:56,600 factors being random variables. 93 00:05:56,600 --> 00:05:59,710 The returns on the assets depend on the underlying factors. 94 00:05:59,710 --> 00:06:04,540 Those are going to be assumed to have some mean, mu_f, 95 00:06:04,540 --> 00:06:07,010 and some covariance matrix. 96 00:06:07,010 --> 00:06:09,760 And basically the dimension of that 97 00:06:09,760 --> 00:06:13,250 covariance matrix omega_f is going to be k by k. 98 00:06:13,250 --> 00:06:16,975 So in terms of modeling this problem, we go from an m 99 00:06:16,975 --> 00:06:22,130 by m system of covariances, correlations, 100 00:06:22,130 --> 00:06:27,360 to focusing initially on an a k by k system of covariances 101 00:06:27,360 --> 00:06:30,730 and correlations between the underlying factors. 102 00:06:30,730 --> 00:06:38,380 Psi is a diagonal matrix with the specific variances 103 00:06:38,380 --> 00:06:40,310 of the underlying assets. 104 00:06:40,310 --> 00:06:50,270 So we have basically epsilon-- the covariance matrix 105 00:06:50,270 --> 00:06:53,010 of the epsilons is a diagonal matrix, 106 00:06:53,010 --> 00:06:59,500 and the covariance matrix of f is given by this omega_f. 107 00:06:59,500 --> 00:07:01,690 Well, with those specifications we 108 00:07:01,690 --> 00:07:09,070 can get the covariance for the overall vector 109 00:07:09,070 --> 00:07:13,880 of the m-variate stochastic process. 110 00:07:13,880 --> 00:07:19,880 And we have this model here for the conditional moments. 111 00:07:19,880 --> 00:07:23,270 Basically, the conditional expectation 112 00:07:23,270 --> 00:07:25,810 of the process given the underlying factors 113 00:07:25,810 --> 00:07:30,310 is this linear model in terms of the underlying factors f. 114 00:07:30,310 --> 00:07:34,025 And the covariance matrix is the psi matrix, which is diagonal. 115 00:07:38,040 --> 00:07:42,840 And the unconditional moments are 116 00:07:42,840 --> 00:07:46,290 obtained by just taking the expectations of these. 117 00:07:46,290 --> 00:07:50,130 Well actually, the unconditional expectation of x is this. 118 00:07:50,130 --> 00:07:52,860 The unconditional covariance of x 119 00:07:52,860 --> 00:07:56,340 is actually equal to the expectation 120 00:07:56,340 --> 00:08:02,129 of this plus the variance of the conditional expectation, 121 00:08:02,129 --> 00:08:04,170 or the covariance of the conditional expectation. 122 00:08:04,170 --> 00:08:08,690 So one of the formulas that's important to realize here 123 00:08:08,690 --> 00:08:13,620 is that if we're considering the covariance of x_t, which 124 00:08:13,620 --> 00:08:21,530 is equal to covariance of B f_t plus epsilon_t, that's 125 00:08:21,530 --> 00:08:27,715 equal to the covariance of B f_t plus the covariance 126 00:08:27,715 --> 00:08:35,100 of epsilon_t plus twice the covariance 127 00:08:35,100 --> 00:08:39,600 between this term and this, but those are uncorrelated. 128 00:08:39,600 --> 00:08:47,520 And so this is equal to B covariance of f_t B transpose 129 00:08:47,520 --> 00:08:49,240 plus psi. 130 00:08:54,700 --> 00:08:56,865 With m assets, how many parameters 131 00:08:56,865 --> 00:08:59,890 are in the covariance matrix if there's 132 00:08:59,890 --> 00:09:02,987 no constraints on the covariance matrix? 133 00:09:02,987 --> 00:09:03,903 AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 134 00:09:07,340 --> 00:09:08,670 PROFESSOR: How many parameters? 135 00:09:08,670 --> 00:09:09,560 Right. 136 00:09:09,560 --> 00:09:11,370 So this is sigma. 137 00:09:11,370 --> 00:09:15,214 So the number of parameters in sigma. 138 00:09:15,214 --> 00:09:16,130 AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 139 00:09:19,954 --> 00:09:21,595 PROFESSOR: m plus what? 140 00:09:21,595 --> 00:09:23,970 AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE]. 141 00:09:23,970 --> 00:09:29,250 PROFESSOR: OK, this is a square matrix, m by m. 142 00:09:29,250 --> 00:09:32,440 So there's possibly m squared, but it's symmetric. 143 00:09:32,440 --> 00:09:36,660 So we're double-counting off the diagonal. 144 00:09:36,660 --> 00:09:39,950 So it's m times m plus 1 over 2. 145 00:09:43,490 --> 00:09:47,540 How many parameters do we have with the factor model? 146 00:09:52,150 --> 00:09:57,210 So if we think of a-- let's call this sigma star. 147 00:09:57,210 --> 00:10:01,640 The number of parameters in sigma star is what? 148 00:10:05,810 --> 00:10:10,986 Well, B is an m by k matrix. 149 00:10:15,920 --> 00:10:22,315 This is m by k, so we have possibly m times k values. 150 00:10:25,870 --> 00:10:39,030 The f_x is-- or the covariance of f_t 151 00:10:39,030 --> 00:10:45,460 is the number of elements in the covariance matrix of f, 152 00:10:45,460 --> 00:10:48,360 which is k by k. 153 00:10:48,360 --> 00:10:58,470 And then we have psi, which is a diagonal of dimension m. 154 00:10:58,470 --> 00:11:00,680 So depending on how we structure things, 155 00:11:00,680 --> 00:11:03,970 we can have many, many fewer parameters in this factor model 156 00:11:03,970 --> 00:11:05,609 than in the unconstrained case. 157 00:11:05,609 --> 00:11:07,400 And we're going to see that we can actually 158 00:11:07,400 --> 00:11:12,630 reduce this number in the covariance matrix of f 159 00:11:12,630 --> 00:11:15,637 dramatically because of flexibility 160 00:11:15,637 --> 00:11:16,720 in choosing those factors. 161 00:11:21,940 --> 00:11:27,990 Well let's also look at the interpretation of the factor 162 00:11:27,990 --> 00:11:30,110 model as a series of time series regressions. 163 00:11:30,110 --> 00:11:35,410 You remember when we talked about multivariate regression 164 00:11:35,410 --> 00:11:38,490 a few lectures ago, we talked about cross-sectional 165 00:11:38,490 --> 00:11:41,760 regressions and time series regressions, 166 00:11:41,760 --> 00:11:45,760 and looking at the collection of all the regressions 167 00:11:45,760 --> 00:11:47,770 in a multivariate regression setting. 168 00:11:47,770 --> 00:11:50,460 Here we can do the same thing. 169 00:11:50,460 --> 00:11:52,620 In contrast to the cross-sectional regression 170 00:11:52,620 --> 00:11:55,680 where we're fixing time and looking at all the assets, 171 00:11:55,680 --> 00:12:01,570 here we're looking at fixing the asset i and the regression 172 00:12:01,570 --> 00:12:04,590 over time for that single asset. 173 00:12:04,590 --> 00:12:09,980 So the values of x_i, ranging from time 1 174 00:12:09,980 --> 00:12:16,130 up to time capital T, basically follows a regression model 175 00:12:16,130 --> 00:12:22,890 that's equal to the intercept alpha_i plus this matrix F 176 00:12:22,890 --> 00:12:30,055 times beta_i, where beta_i corresponds to the regression 177 00:12:30,055 --> 00:12:31,680 parameters in this regression, but they 178 00:12:31,680 --> 00:12:35,985 are the factor corresponding to an asset i on the different k 179 00:12:35,985 --> 00:12:36,485 factors. 180 00:12:39,430 --> 00:12:45,470 In this setting, the covariance matrix of the epsilon_i vector 181 00:12:45,470 --> 00:12:50,640 is the diagonal matrix sigma squared times the identity. 182 00:12:50,640 --> 00:12:54,580 And so this is the classic Gauss-Markov assumptions 183 00:12:54,580 --> 00:12:58,180 for a single linear regression model. 184 00:13:04,530 --> 00:13:09,600 Well, as we did previously, we can group together 185 00:13:09,600 --> 00:13:13,700 all of these time series regressions for all the m 186 00:13:13,700 --> 00:13:19,220 assets together by simply putting them all together. 187 00:13:19,220 --> 00:13:28,620 So we start off with x_i equal to basically F beta_i 188 00:13:28,620 --> 00:13:31,030 plus epsilon_i. 189 00:13:31,030 --> 00:13:39,980 And we can basically consider x_1, x_2, up to x_n. 190 00:13:39,980 --> 00:13:46,260 So we have a T by m matrix for the m assets. 191 00:13:46,260 --> 00:13:56,230 And that's equal to a regression model given by basically 192 00:13:56,230 --> 00:13:58,470 what's on the slides here. 193 00:13:58,470 --> 00:14:01,370 So basically, we're able to group everything together 194 00:14:01,370 --> 00:14:05,900 and deal with everything all at once, which computationally 195 00:14:05,900 --> 00:14:08,530 is applied in fitting these. 196 00:14:16,630 --> 00:14:21,780 Let's look at the simplest example of a factor model. 197 00:14:21,780 --> 00:14:24,610 This is the single-factor model of Sharpe. 198 00:14:24,610 --> 00:14:27,640 We went through the capital asset pricing model, 199 00:14:27,640 --> 00:14:33,382 how returns on assets and stocks are basically-- 200 00:14:33,382 --> 00:14:35,090 the excess return on stock can be modeled 201 00:14:35,090 --> 00:14:39,360 in terms as a linear regression on the excess return 202 00:14:39,360 --> 00:14:40,530 of the market. 203 00:14:40,530 --> 00:14:43,860 And the regression parameter beta_i 204 00:14:43,860 --> 00:14:48,760 corresponds to the level of risk associated with the asset. 205 00:14:48,760 --> 00:14:54,110 And all we're doing in this model is, 206 00:14:54,110 --> 00:14:57,050 by choosing different assets we're choosing assets 207 00:14:57,050 --> 00:15:01,800 with different levels of risk scaled by the beta_i. 208 00:15:01,800 --> 00:15:04,510 And they may have returns that vary 209 00:15:04,510 --> 00:15:08,760 across assets given by alpha_i. 210 00:15:08,760 --> 00:15:16,380 The covariance matrix of the assets 211 00:15:16,380 --> 00:15:18,600 has-- the unconditional covariance matrix 212 00:15:18,600 --> 00:15:20,540 has this structure. 213 00:15:20,540 --> 00:15:25,190 It's basically equal to the variance of the market times 214 00:15:25,190 --> 00:15:28,580 beta beta prime plus psi. 215 00:15:28,580 --> 00:15:33,780 And so that equation is really very simple. 216 00:15:37,070 --> 00:15:41,270 It's really self-evident from what we've discussed, but let 217 00:15:41,270 --> 00:15:45,580 me just highlight what it is. 218 00:15:45,580 --> 00:15:53,276 Sigma squared beta beta transposed plus psi. 219 00:15:53,276 --> 00:15:55,170 And that's equal to sigma squared 220 00:15:55,170 --> 00:15:58,720 times basically a column vector of all the betas, beta_1 down 221 00:15:58,720 --> 00:16:08,460 to beta_m times its transpose plus a diagonal matrix 222 00:16:08,460 --> 00:16:09,740 with the psi. 223 00:16:09,740 --> 00:16:12,460 So this is really a very, very simple structure 224 00:16:12,460 --> 00:16:14,790 for the covariance. 225 00:16:14,790 --> 00:16:18,610 And if you had wanted to apply this model to thousands 226 00:16:18,610 --> 00:16:20,850 of securities, it's basically no problem. 227 00:16:20,850 --> 00:16:23,270 You can construct a covariance matrix. 228 00:16:23,270 --> 00:16:26,510 And if this were appropriate for a large collection 229 00:16:26,510 --> 00:16:30,110 of securities, then the amount-- the reduction 230 00:16:30,110 --> 00:16:35,810 in terms of what you're estimating is enormous. 231 00:16:35,810 --> 00:16:39,103 Rather than estimating each cross-correlation 232 00:16:39,103 --> 00:16:44,190 and covariance of all the assets, 233 00:16:44,190 --> 00:16:49,190 the factor model tells us what those cross covariances are. 234 00:16:49,190 --> 00:16:54,141 So that's really where the power of the model comes in. 235 00:16:54,141 --> 00:16:58,310 And in terms of why is this so useful, 236 00:16:58,310 --> 00:17:03,980 well in portfolio management one of the key drivers 237 00:17:03,980 --> 00:17:07,450 of asset allocation is the covariance matrix 238 00:17:07,450 --> 00:17:08,460 of the assets. 239 00:17:08,460 --> 00:17:09,910 So if you have an effective model 240 00:17:09,910 --> 00:17:12,319 for modeling the covariance, then that 241 00:17:12,319 --> 00:17:14,920 simplifies the portfolio allocation problem 242 00:17:14,920 --> 00:17:17,800 because you can specify a covariance matrix 243 00:17:17,800 --> 00:17:20,510 that you are confident with. 244 00:17:20,510 --> 00:17:28,089 And also in risk management, effective models 245 00:17:28,089 --> 00:17:32,010 of risk management deal with, how 246 00:17:32,010 --> 00:17:37,820 do we anticipate what would happen if different scenarios 247 00:17:37,820 --> 00:17:38,750 occur in the market? 248 00:17:38,750 --> 00:17:41,320 Well, the different scenarios that can occur 249 00:17:41,320 --> 00:17:45,900 can be associated with what's happening to underlying factors 250 00:17:45,900 --> 00:17:48,460 that affect the system. 251 00:17:48,460 --> 00:17:51,580 And so we can consider risk management approaches 252 00:17:51,580 --> 00:17:54,200 that vary these underlying factors, and look at 253 00:17:54,200 --> 00:17:57,172 how that has an impact on the covariance matrix 254 00:17:57,172 --> 00:17:57,755 very directly. 255 00:18:04,640 --> 00:18:08,350 Estimation of Sharpe's single index model. 256 00:18:08,350 --> 00:18:11,460 We went through before how we estimate 257 00:18:11,460 --> 00:18:14,970 the alphas and the betas. 258 00:18:14,970 --> 00:18:17,440 In terms of estimating the sigmas-- 259 00:18:17,440 --> 00:18:20,800 the specific variances-- basically, 260 00:18:20,800 --> 00:18:23,640 that comes from the simple regression as well. 261 00:18:23,640 --> 00:18:26,920 Basically, the sum of the squared estimated residuals 262 00:18:26,920 --> 00:18:28,840 divided by t minus 2. 263 00:18:28,840 --> 00:18:31,870 Here we're assuming unbiasedness because we have two parameters 264 00:18:31,870 --> 00:18:34,220 estimated per model. 265 00:18:34,220 --> 00:18:40,700 Then for the market portfolio, that basically 266 00:18:40,700 --> 00:18:42,580 has a simple estimate as well. 267 00:18:42,580 --> 00:18:46,470 The psi hat matrix would just be the diagonal 268 00:18:46,470 --> 00:18:53,680 of that-- the diagonal of the specific variances. 269 00:18:53,680 --> 00:18:56,620 And then the unconditional covariance matrix 270 00:18:56,620 --> 00:19:00,940 is estimated by simply plugging in these parameter estimates. 271 00:19:00,940 --> 00:19:08,490 So, very simple and effective if that single-factor 272 00:19:08,490 --> 00:19:09,760 model is appropriate. 273 00:19:09,760 --> 00:19:13,660 Now needless to say, a single-factor model 274 00:19:13,660 --> 00:19:18,860 doesn't characterize the structure of the covariances 275 00:19:18,860 --> 00:19:22,220 and/or the returns typically. 276 00:19:22,220 --> 00:19:26,860 And so we want to consider more general models, 277 00:19:26,860 --> 00:19:28,880 multi-factor models. 278 00:19:28,880 --> 00:19:31,160 And the first set of models we're going to talk about 279 00:19:31,160 --> 00:19:36,640 are common factor variables that can actually be observed. 280 00:19:39,630 --> 00:19:44,430 Basically any factor that you can observe 281 00:19:44,430 --> 00:19:49,480 is a potential candidate for being a relevant factor 282 00:19:49,480 --> 00:19:51,240 in a linear factor model. 283 00:19:51,240 --> 00:19:54,100 The effectiveness of a potential factor 284 00:19:54,100 --> 00:19:56,490 is determined by fitting the model 285 00:19:56,490 --> 00:20:00,050 and seeing how much contribution that factor 286 00:20:00,050 --> 00:20:03,567 makes to the explanation of the returns 287 00:20:03,567 --> 00:20:04,775 and the covariance structure. 288 00:20:07,300 --> 00:20:12,970 Chen, Ross, and Roll wrote a classic paper in 1986. 289 00:20:12,970 --> 00:20:17,460 Now Ross is actually here at MIT. 290 00:20:17,460 --> 00:20:30,580 And with their paper, they looked at modeling-- 291 00:20:30,580 --> 00:20:32,180 rather than looking at these factors 292 00:20:32,180 --> 00:20:34,560 directly, including those in the model, 293 00:20:34,560 --> 00:20:39,940 they looked at transforming these factors 294 00:20:39,940 --> 00:20:43,080 into surprise factors. 295 00:20:43,080 --> 00:20:47,550 So rather than having interest rates just 296 00:20:47,550 --> 00:20:50,230 as a simple factor directly plugged into the model, 297 00:20:50,230 --> 00:20:54,100 it would be the change in interest rates. 298 00:20:54,100 --> 00:20:56,890 And additionally, not only just the change in interest rate, 299 00:20:56,890 --> 00:20:59,180 but the unanticipated change in interest 300 00:20:59,180 --> 00:21:01,550 rates given market information. 301 00:21:01,550 --> 00:21:07,480 So their paper goes through modeling different 302 00:21:07,480 --> 00:21:12,130 macroeconomic variables with vector autoregression models, 303 00:21:12,130 --> 00:21:17,270 and then using those to specify unanticipated changes 304 00:21:17,270 --> 00:21:19,540 in these underlying factors. 305 00:21:19,540 --> 00:21:22,680 And so that's where the power comes in. 306 00:21:22,680 --> 00:21:27,680 And that highlights how when you're applying these models, 307 00:21:27,680 --> 00:21:30,960 it does involve some creativity to get the most bang 308 00:21:30,960 --> 00:21:32,340 for the buck with your models. 309 00:21:32,340 --> 00:21:36,780 And the idea they had of incorporating unanticipated 310 00:21:36,780 --> 00:21:39,060 changes was really a very good one 311 00:21:39,060 --> 00:21:41,555 and is applied quite widely now. 312 00:21:55,050 --> 00:22:03,380 Now with this setup, one basically-- 313 00:22:03,380 --> 00:22:10,040 if one has empirical data over times 1 through capital T, 314 00:22:10,040 --> 00:22:13,580 then if one wants to specify these models, 315 00:22:13,580 --> 00:22:17,740 one has their observations on the x_i process. 316 00:22:17,740 --> 00:22:22,120 You basically have observed all the returns historically. 317 00:22:22,120 --> 00:22:24,940 We also, because the factors are observable, 318 00:22:24,940 --> 00:22:29,290 have the F matrix as a set of observed variables. 319 00:22:29,290 --> 00:22:36,300 So we can basically use those to estimate the beta_i's and also 320 00:22:36,300 --> 00:22:40,970 estimate the variances of the residual terms 321 00:22:40,970 --> 00:22:44,310 with simple regression methods. 322 00:22:44,310 --> 00:22:49,970 So implementing these is quite feasible, 323 00:22:49,970 --> 00:22:53,860 and basically applies methods that we have from before. 324 00:22:53,860 --> 00:23:01,110 So what this slide now discusses is how we basically estimate 325 00:23:01,110 --> 00:23:02,700 the underlying parameters. 326 00:23:02,700 --> 00:23:06,990 We need to be a little bit careful about the Gauss-Markov 327 00:23:06,990 --> 00:23:08,210 assumptions. 328 00:23:08,210 --> 00:23:15,100 You'll remember that if we have a regression model where 329 00:23:15,100 --> 00:23:18,650 the residual terms are uncorrelated and constant 330 00:23:18,650 --> 00:23:22,560 variance, then the simple linear regression 331 00:23:22,560 --> 00:23:25,210 estimates are the best ones. 332 00:23:25,210 --> 00:23:32,740 If there is unequal variances of the residuals, 333 00:23:32,740 --> 00:23:36,650 and maybe even covariances, then we 334 00:23:36,650 --> 00:23:40,250 need to use generalized least squares. 335 00:23:40,250 --> 00:23:46,850 So the notes go through those computations and the formulas, 336 00:23:46,850 --> 00:23:51,380 which are just simple extensions of our regression model theory 337 00:23:51,380 --> 00:23:53,755 that we had in previous lectures. 338 00:24:04,240 --> 00:24:11,433 Let me go through an example. 339 00:24:17,720 --> 00:24:19,790 With common factor variables that 340 00:24:19,790 --> 00:24:25,560 are using either fundamental or asset-specific attributes, 341 00:24:25,560 --> 00:24:29,047 there's the approach of-- well, it's called the BARRA Approach. 342 00:24:29,047 --> 00:24:30,213 This is from Barr Rosenberg. 343 00:24:33,470 --> 00:24:36,090 Actually, I have to say, he was one of the inspirations 344 00:24:36,090 --> 00:24:41,040 to me for going into statistical modeling and finance. 345 00:24:41,040 --> 00:24:44,910 He was a professor at UC Berkeley who left academics 346 00:24:44,910 --> 00:24:51,770 very early to basically apply models in trade money. 347 00:24:51,770 --> 00:24:55,250 As an anecdote, his current situation 348 00:24:55,250 --> 00:24:57,210 is a little different. 349 00:24:57,210 --> 00:24:58,620 I'll let you look that up. 350 00:24:58,620 --> 00:25:04,170 But anyway, this approach basically 351 00:25:04,170 --> 00:25:09,260 provided the BARRA Approach for factor modeling and risk 352 00:25:09,260 --> 00:25:11,950 analysis, which is still used extensively today. 353 00:25:15,360 --> 00:25:23,710 So with common factor variables using 354 00:25:23,710 --> 00:25:28,740 asset-specific attributes-- in fact, 355 00:25:28,740 --> 00:25:33,890 the factor realizations are unobserved 356 00:25:33,890 --> 00:25:38,960 but are estimated in the application of these models. 357 00:25:38,960 --> 00:25:41,930 So let's see how that goes. 358 00:25:41,930 --> 00:25:50,410 Oh, OK, this slide talks about the Fama-French approach, which 359 00:25:50,410 --> 00:25:54,610 concerns-- OK, Fama and French, Fama of course 360 00:25:54,610 --> 00:25:56,780 we talked about him in the last lecture. 361 00:25:56,780 --> 00:25:58,920 He got the Nobel Prize for his work 362 00:25:58,920 --> 00:26:05,220 in modeling asset price returns and market efficiency. 363 00:26:05,220 --> 00:26:08,230 Fama and French found that there were 364 00:26:08,230 --> 00:26:11,860 some very important factors affecting 365 00:26:11,860 --> 00:26:14,330 asset returns in equities. 366 00:26:14,330 --> 00:26:18,300 Basically, returns tended to vary depending 367 00:26:18,300 --> 00:26:20,910 upon the size of firms. 368 00:26:20,910 --> 00:26:25,680 So if you consider small firms versus large firms, 369 00:26:25,680 --> 00:26:27,516 small firms tended to have returns that were 370 00:26:27,516 --> 00:26:28,640 more similar to each other. 371 00:26:28,640 --> 00:26:30,660 Large firms tended to have returns that were 372 00:26:30,660 --> 00:26:32,110 more similar to each other. 373 00:26:32,110 --> 00:26:35,920 So there's basically a big versus small factor 374 00:26:35,920 --> 00:26:38,500 that is operating in the market. 375 00:26:38,500 --> 00:26:40,610 Sometimes the market prefers small stocks, 376 00:26:40,610 --> 00:26:42,790 sometimes it prefers large stocks. 377 00:26:42,790 --> 00:26:48,580 And similarly, there's another factor 378 00:26:48,580 --> 00:26:50,950 which is value versus growth. 379 00:26:54,030 --> 00:26:58,410 Basically, stocks that are considered good values 380 00:26:58,410 --> 00:27:02,914 are stocks which are cheap, basically, for what they have. 381 00:27:02,914 --> 00:27:04,955 So you're basically getting a stock at a discount 382 00:27:04,955 --> 00:27:08,390 if you're getting a good value. 383 00:27:08,390 --> 00:27:12,500 And value stocks can be measured by looking at the price 384 00:27:12,500 --> 00:27:13,165 to book equity. 385 00:27:13,165 --> 00:27:15,940 If that's low, then the price you're 386 00:27:15,940 --> 00:27:20,600 paying for that equity in the firm is low, and it's cheap. 387 00:27:20,600 --> 00:27:24,150 And that compares with stocks for which 388 00:27:24,150 --> 00:27:28,110 the price relative to the book value is very, very high. 389 00:27:28,110 --> 00:27:32,240 Why are people willing to pay a lot for stocks? 390 00:27:32,240 --> 00:27:35,000 In that case, well it's because the growth prospects 391 00:27:35,000 --> 00:27:39,030 of those stocks is high, and there's an anticipation 392 00:27:39,030 --> 00:27:41,580 basically that the current price is just 393 00:27:41,580 --> 00:27:47,610 reflecting a projection of how much growth potential there is. 394 00:27:47,610 --> 00:27:51,670 Now the Fama French approach is for each of these factors 395 00:27:51,670 --> 00:27:57,080 to basically rank order all the stocks by this factor 396 00:27:57,080 --> 00:28:01,800 and divide them up into quintiles. 397 00:28:01,800 --> 00:28:06,550 So say this is market cap. 398 00:28:06,550 --> 00:28:12,030 We can divide up all the stocks in-- basically 399 00:28:12,030 --> 00:28:15,000 consider a histogram, or whatever, 400 00:28:15,000 --> 00:28:18,230 of all the market caps of all the stocks in our universe. 401 00:28:18,230 --> 00:28:23,500 And then divide it up into basically the bottom fifth, 402 00:28:23,500 --> 00:28:27,026 the next fifth, and then-- it probably 403 00:28:27,026 --> 00:28:29,830 needs to go up-- the top fifth. 404 00:28:33,120 --> 00:28:35,960 And the Fama-French approach says, well, 405 00:28:35,960 --> 00:28:41,080 let's look at an equal-weighted average of the top fifth. 406 00:28:41,080 --> 00:28:50,920 And basically, buy that and sell the bottom fifth. 407 00:28:50,920 --> 00:28:55,620 And so that would be the big versus small market 408 00:28:55,620 --> 00:28:57,640 factor of Fama and French. 409 00:28:57,640 --> 00:29:00,300 Now, if you look at their work, they actually 410 00:29:00,300 --> 00:29:03,080 do the bottom minus the top, because the value 411 00:29:03,080 --> 00:29:04,670 tends to outperform the other. 412 00:29:04,670 --> 00:29:07,010 So they have a factor whose more positive 413 00:29:07,010 --> 00:29:08,510 values and associated more generally 414 00:29:08,510 --> 00:29:10,660 with positive returns. 415 00:29:10,660 --> 00:29:14,780 But that factor can be applied and used 416 00:29:14,780 --> 00:29:20,400 to correlate with individual asset returns as well. 417 00:29:26,590 --> 00:29:28,580 Now, with the BARRA Industry Factor-- 418 00:29:28,580 --> 00:29:35,960 this is just getting back to the BARRA Approach-- 419 00:29:35,960 --> 00:29:37,840 the simplest case of understanding 420 00:29:37,840 --> 00:29:40,580 the BARRA industry factor models is 421 00:29:40,580 --> 00:29:42,820 to consider looking at dividing stocks up 422 00:29:42,820 --> 00:29:45,020 into different industry groups. 423 00:29:45,020 --> 00:29:56,610 So we might expect that, say oil stocks will 424 00:29:56,610 --> 00:30:02,100 tend to move together and have greater variability 425 00:30:02,100 --> 00:30:04,790 or common variability. 426 00:30:04,790 --> 00:30:10,640 And that could be very different from utility stocks, which 427 00:30:10,640 --> 00:30:13,105 tend to actually be quite low-risk stocks. 428 00:30:17,749 --> 00:30:19,290 Utility companies are companies which 429 00:30:19,290 --> 00:30:21,910 are very highly regulated. 430 00:30:21,910 --> 00:30:26,360 And the profitability of those firms 431 00:30:26,360 --> 00:30:30,850 is basically overlooked by the regulators. 432 00:30:30,850 --> 00:30:37,110 They don't want the utilities to gouge consumers 433 00:30:37,110 --> 00:30:41,890 and make too much profit from delivering power to customers. 434 00:30:41,890 --> 00:30:46,555 So utilities tend to have fairly low volatility 435 00:30:46,555 --> 00:30:50,330 but very consistent returns, which 436 00:30:50,330 --> 00:30:55,530 are based on reasonable, from a regulatory standpoint, 437 00:30:55,530 --> 00:30:58,110 levels of profitability for those companies. 438 00:30:58,110 --> 00:31:03,270 Well with an industry factor model, what we can do 439 00:31:03,270 --> 00:31:08,710 is associate factor loadings, which basically 440 00:31:08,710 --> 00:31:13,570 are loading each asset in terms of which industry group 441 00:31:13,570 --> 00:31:14,520 it's in. 442 00:31:14,520 --> 00:31:20,140 So we actually know the beta values for these stocks, 443 00:31:20,140 --> 00:31:23,080 but we don't know the underlying factor 444 00:31:23,080 --> 00:31:26,400 realizations for these stocks. 445 00:31:26,400 --> 00:31:29,480 But in terms of the betas, with these factors 446 00:31:29,480 --> 00:31:34,641 we can basically get a well defined beta vectors and B 447 00:31:34,641 --> 00:31:37,390 matrix for all the stocks. 448 00:31:37,390 --> 00:31:40,650 And the problem then is, how do we 449 00:31:40,650 --> 00:31:44,540 specify the realization of the underlying factors? 450 00:31:44,540 --> 00:31:51,000 Well the realization of the underlying factors 451 00:31:51,000 --> 00:31:56,190 basically is just estimated with a regression model. 452 00:31:56,190 --> 00:32:06,300 And so if we have all of our assets x_i for different times 453 00:32:06,300 --> 00:32:13,700 t, those would have a model given by factor realizations 454 00:32:13,700 --> 00:32:21,380 corresponding to the k industry groups with known beta_(i,j) 455 00:32:21,380 --> 00:32:21,880 values. 456 00:32:29,010 --> 00:32:34,030 And the estimation of these, we basically 457 00:32:34,030 --> 00:32:36,940 have a simple regression model where 458 00:32:36,940 --> 00:32:43,060 the realizations of the factor returns f_t 459 00:32:43,060 --> 00:32:45,840 are given by essentially a regression coefficient 460 00:32:45,840 --> 00:32:50,270 in this regression, where we have the asset returns 461 00:32:50,270 --> 00:32:54,840 x_t, the known factor loadings B, 462 00:32:54,840 --> 00:32:58,520 the unknown factor realizations f_t. 463 00:32:58,520 --> 00:33:01,930 And just plugging into the regression, 464 00:33:01,930 --> 00:33:05,500 if we do it very simply we get this expression 465 00:33:05,500 --> 00:33:10,710 for f hat t, which is the simple linear regression model 466 00:33:10,710 --> 00:33:13,310 estimating those realizations. 467 00:33:13,310 --> 00:33:20,660 Now this particular estimate of the factor realizations 468 00:33:20,660 --> 00:33:29,020 is assuming that the variability of the components of x 469 00:33:29,020 --> 00:33:31,960 have the same variance. 470 00:33:31,960 --> 00:33:33,830 This is like the linear regression 471 00:33:33,830 --> 00:33:36,940 estimates under normal Gauss-Markov assumptions. 472 00:33:36,940 --> 00:33:42,970 But basically the epsilon_i's will 473 00:33:42,970 --> 00:33:44,420 vary across the different assets. 474 00:33:44,420 --> 00:33:47,240 The different assets will have different variabilities, 475 00:33:47,240 --> 00:33:48,500 different specific variances. 476 00:33:48,500 --> 00:33:53,630 So that's actually going to be heteroscedasticity 477 00:33:53,630 --> 00:33:54,720 in these models. 478 00:33:54,720 --> 00:33:57,840 So this particular vector of industry averages 479 00:33:57,840 --> 00:34:06,670 should actually be extended to accommodate for that. 480 00:34:06,670 --> 00:34:10,940 So we have the estimation of the covariance matrix 481 00:34:10,940 --> 00:34:14,900 of the factors can then be estimated 482 00:34:14,900 --> 00:34:17,909 using these estimates of the realizations. 483 00:34:17,909 --> 00:34:21,599 And our estimation of the residual covariance matrix 484 00:34:21,599 --> 00:34:22,515 can then be estimated. 485 00:34:25,310 --> 00:34:29,639 So I guess an initial estimate of the covariance matrix sigma 486 00:34:29,639 --> 00:34:34,409 hat is given by this known matrix B times our sample 487 00:34:34,409 --> 00:34:39,340 estimate of the factor realizations plus the diagonal 488 00:34:39,340 --> 00:34:42,330 matrix C hat. 489 00:34:42,330 --> 00:34:46,310 And a second step in this process 490 00:34:46,310 --> 00:34:49,659 can incorporate information about there 491 00:34:49,659 --> 00:34:53,659 being heteroscedasticity along the diagonal of the psi's 492 00:34:53,659 --> 00:34:56,699 to adjust the regression estimates. 493 00:34:56,699 --> 00:35:00,950 So we basically get a refinement of the estimates 494 00:35:00,950 --> 00:35:05,640 that does account for the non-constant variability. 495 00:35:05,640 --> 00:35:13,750 Now this property of heteroscedasticity verses 496 00:35:13,750 --> 00:35:20,270 homoscedasticity in estimating the regression parameters, 497 00:35:20,270 --> 00:35:22,460 it may seem like this is a nicety 498 00:35:22,460 --> 00:35:27,550 of the statistical theory that we just have to try and check, 499 00:35:27,550 --> 00:35:29,180 but it's not too big a deal. 500 00:35:29,180 --> 00:35:36,820 But let me highlight where this issue comes up again and again. 501 00:35:36,820 --> 00:35:43,880 With portfolio optimization, we went through last time-- 502 00:35:43,880 --> 00:35:46,300 for mean-variance optimization, we 503 00:35:46,300 --> 00:35:50,550 want to consider a weighting of assets that basically weights 504 00:35:50,550 --> 00:35:56,640 the assets by the expected returns, pre-multiplied 505 00:35:56,640 --> 00:36:00,500 by the inverse of the covariance matrix. 506 00:36:00,500 --> 00:36:04,150 And so we basically in portfolio allocation 507 00:36:04,150 --> 00:36:07,010 want to allocate to assets with high return, 508 00:36:07,010 --> 00:36:10,970 but we're going to penalize those with high variance. 509 00:36:10,970 --> 00:36:21,450 And so the impact of discounting values with high variability 510 00:36:21,450 --> 00:36:23,810 arises in asset allocation. 511 00:36:23,810 --> 00:36:27,480 And then of course arises in statistical estimation. 512 00:36:27,480 --> 00:36:30,160 Basically with signals with high noise, 513 00:36:30,160 --> 00:36:33,070 you want to normalize by the level of noise 514 00:36:33,070 --> 00:36:37,900 before you incorporate the impact of that variable 515 00:36:37,900 --> 00:36:38,900 on the particular model. 516 00:36:45,400 --> 00:36:47,560 So here are just some notes about the inefficiency 517 00:36:47,560 --> 00:36:50,170 of estimates due to heteroscedasticity. 518 00:36:50,170 --> 00:36:53,032 We can apply generalized least squares. 519 00:36:53,032 --> 00:36:56,470 A second bullet here is that factor realizations 520 00:36:56,470 --> 00:37:00,063 can be scaled to represent factor mimicking portfolios. 521 00:37:02,690 --> 00:37:06,360 Now with the Fama-French factors, 522 00:37:06,360 --> 00:37:09,360 where we have say big versus small stocks or value 523 00:37:09,360 --> 00:37:11,410 versus growth stocks, it would be 524 00:37:11,410 --> 00:37:16,060 nice to know, well what's the real value of trading 525 00:37:16,060 --> 00:37:17,390 that factor? 526 00:37:17,390 --> 00:37:21,550 If you were to have unit weight to trading that factor, 527 00:37:21,550 --> 00:37:22,740 would you make money or not? 528 00:37:22,740 --> 00:37:26,040 Or under what periods would you make money? 529 00:37:26,040 --> 00:37:31,010 And the notion of factor mimicking portfolios 530 00:37:31,010 --> 00:37:31,590 is important. 531 00:37:31,590 --> 00:37:38,060 Let's go back to the specification of the factor 532 00:37:38,060 --> 00:37:41,440 realizations here. 533 00:37:41,440 --> 00:37:48,210 f hat t, the t-th realization of the factors, their k factors, 534 00:37:48,210 --> 00:37:50,680 is given by essentially the regression estimate 535 00:37:50,680 --> 00:37:54,400 of those factors from the realizations of the asset 536 00:37:54,400 --> 00:37:55,150 returns. 537 00:37:55,150 --> 00:37:57,230 And if we're doing this in the proper way, 538 00:37:57,230 --> 00:38:01,370 we'd be correcting for the heteroscedasticity. 539 00:38:01,370 --> 00:38:06,810 Well this realization of the factor returns 540 00:38:06,810 --> 00:38:17,430 is a weighted average or a weighted sum of the x_t. 541 00:38:17,430 --> 00:38:29,100 So we have basically f_t is equal to a matrix times 542 00:38:29,100 --> 00:38:39,409 x_t, where this is B B prime toe the minus one, B prime. 543 00:38:42,250 --> 00:38:49,216 So our k-dimensional realizations-- let's see, 544 00:38:49,216 --> 00:38:54,000 this is basically k by 1. 545 00:38:57,470 --> 00:39:04,100 Each of these k factors is a weighted sum of these x's. 546 00:39:04,100 --> 00:39:06,570 Now the x's, if these are returns on the underlying 547 00:39:06,570 --> 00:39:13,770 assets, then we can consider normalizing these factors. 548 00:39:13,770 --> 00:39:16,740 Or basically normalizing this matrix here 549 00:39:16,740 --> 00:39:23,880 so that the row weights sum to 1, say, for a unit of capital. 550 00:39:23,880 --> 00:39:28,380 So if we were to invest a net unit of one capital 551 00:39:28,380 --> 00:39:32,550 unit in these assets, then this factor realization 552 00:39:32,550 --> 00:39:38,510 would give us the return on a portfolio of the assets 553 00:39:38,510 --> 00:39:43,290 that is perfectly correlated with the factor realization. 554 00:39:43,290 --> 00:39:49,820 So factor mimicking portfolios can be defined that way. 555 00:39:49,820 --> 00:39:54,220 And they have a good interpretation 556 00:39:54,220 --> 00:39:57,080 in terms of the realization of potential investments. 557 00:40:02,980 --> 00:40:03,990 So let's go back. 558 00:40:18,000 --> 00:40:21,870 The next subject is statistical factor models. 559 00:40:21,870 --> 00:40:26,540 This is the case where we begin the analysis 560 00:40:26,540 --> 00:40:31,740 with just our collection of outcomes for the process x_t. 561 00:40:31,740 --> 00:40:34,150 So basically our time series of asset 562 00:40:34,150 --> 00:40:40,100 returns for m assets over T time units. 563 00:40:40,100 --> 00:40:44,300 And we have no clue initially what the underlying factors 564 00:40:44,300 --> 00:40:47,360 are, but we hypothesize that there are factors that 565 00:40:47,360 --> 00:40:49,570 do characterize the returns. 566 00:40:49,570 --> 00:40:52,090 And factor analysis and principal components analysis 567 00:40:52,090 --> 00:40:57,890 provide ways of uncovering those underlying factors 568 00:40:57,890 --> 00:41:01,335 and defining them in terms of the data themselves. 569 00:41:15,540 --> 00:41:18,020 So we'll first talk about factor analysis. 570 00:41:18,020 --> 00:41:21,290 Then we'll turn to principal components analysis. 571 00:41:21,290 --> 00:41:26,290 Both of these methods are efforts 572 00:41:26,290 --> 00:41:29,360 to model the covariance matrix. 573 00:41:29,360 --> 00:41:37,710 And the underlying covariance matrix for the assets x 574 00:41:37,710 --> 00:41:40,810 can be estimated with sample data in terms of the sample 575 00:41:40,810 --> 00:41:42,100 covariance matrix. 576 00:41:42,100 --> 00:41:45,090 So here I've just written out in matrix form 577 00:41:45,090 --> 00:41:47,700 how that would be computed. 578 00:41:47,700 --> 00:41:57,260 And so with this m by T matrix x, we basically 579 00:41:57,260 --> 00:42:03,280 take that matrix, take out the means by computing 580 00:42:03,280 --> 00:42:06,380 the means with multiplying by this matrix, 581 00:42:06,380 --> 00:42:10,480 and then take the sum of deviations 582 00:42:10,480 --> 00:42:14,280 about the means for all the m assets 583 00:42:14,280 --> 00:42:17,470 individually and across each other, 584 00:42:17,470 --> 00:42:40,170 and divide that by capital T. 585 00:42:40,170 --> 00:42:42,750 Now, the setup for statistical factor models 586 00:42:42,750 --> 00:42:48,810 is exactly the same as before, except the only thing 587 00:42:48,810 --> 00:42:51,620 that we observe is x_t. 588 00:42:51,620 --> 00:42:59,490 So we're hypothesizing a model where alpha is basically 589 00:42:59,490 --> 00:43:06,580 a vector that is basically the vector of mean returns 590 00:43:06,580 --> 00:43:08,420 of the individual assets. 591 00:43:08,420 --> 00:43:14,500 B is a matrix of factor loadings on k factors f_t. 592 00:43:14,500 --> 00:43:18,240 And epsilon_t is white noise with mean 0, 593 00:43:18,240 --> 00:43:20,910 covariance matrix given by the diagonal. 594 00:43:20,910 --> 00:43:25,410 So the setup here is the same basic setup as before, 595 00:43:25,410 --> 00:43:33,100 but we don't have the matrix B or the vector f_t. 596 00:43:35,790 --> 00:43:37,030 Or, of course, alpha. 597 00:43:39,920 --> 00:43:43,240 Now in this setup, it's important 598 00:43:43,240 --> 00:43:49,920 that there is an indeterminacy of this model, 599 00:43:49,920 --> 00:43:57,450 because for any given specification of the matrix B 600 00:43:57,450 --> 00:44:04,540 or the factors f, we can actually transform those 601 00:44:04,540 --> 00:44:09,840 by a k by k invertible matrix H. So for a given 602 00:44:09,840 --> 00:44:13,900 specification of this model, if we transform the underlying 603 00:44:13,900 --> 00:44:19,230 factor realizations f by the matrix H, which is k by k, 604 00:44:19,230 --> 00:44:25,890 then if we transform the factor loadings B by H inverse, 605 00:44:25,890 --> 00:44:28,290 we get the same model. 606 00:44:28,290 --> 00:44:31,800 So there is an indeterminacy here, or a-- OK, 607 00:44:31,800 --> 00:44:37,940 there's an indeterminacy of these particular variables, 608 00:44:37,940 --> 00:44:41,970 but there's basically flexibility in how 609 00:44:41,970 --> 00:44:44,630 we define the factor model. 610 00:44:44,630 --> 00:44:48,050 So in trying to uncover a factor model with statistical factor 611 00:44:48,050 --> 00:44:50,990 analysis, there is some flexibility 612 00:44:50,990 --> 00:44:53,130 in defining our factors. 613 00:44:53,130 --> 00:44:57,030 We can arbitrarily transform the factors 614 00:44:57,030 --> 00:45:00,500 by an invertible transformation in the k space. 615 00:45:15,050 --> 00:45:19,560 And I guess it's important to note that what changes 616 00:45:19,560 --> 00:45:22,550 when we do that transformation? 617 00:45:22,550 --> 00:45:24,570 Well the linear function stays the same 618 00:45:24,570 --> 00:45:28,040 in terms of the covariance matrix of the underlying 619 00:45:28,040 --> 00:45:29,180 factors. 620 00:45:29,180 --> 00:45:31,880 Well, if we have a covariance matrix for those underlying 621 00:45:31,880 --> 00:45:36,350 factors, we need to accommodate the matrix transformation 622 00:45:36,350 --> 00:45:37,690 H in that. 623 00:45:37,690 --> 00:45:39,640 So that has an impact there. 624 00:45:39,640 --> 00:45:44,030 But one of the things we can do is 625 00:45:44,030 --> 00:45:49,040 consider trying to define a matrix H, that 626 00:45:49,040 --> 00:45:50,780 diagonalizes the factors. 627 00:45:50,780 --> 00:45:53,790 So in some settings, it's useful to consider factor models where 628 00:45:53,790 --> 00:46:00,260 you have uncorrelated factor components. 629 00:46:00,260 --> 00:46:04,140 And it's possible to define linear factor 630 00:46:04,140 --> 00:46:09,290 models with uncorrelated factor components by a choice of H. 631 00:46:09,290 --> 00:46:12,440 So with any linear factor model in fact, 632 00:46:12,440 --> 00:46:17,571 we can have uncorrelated factor components if that's useful. 633 00:46:21,720 --> 00:46:26,300 So this first bullet highlights that point 634 00:46:26,300 --> 00:46:30,200 that we can get orthonormal factors. 635 00:46:32,930 --> 00:46:37,490 And we can also have zero mean factors 636 00:46:37,490 --> 00:46:41,530 by adjusting the data to incorporate 637 00:46:41,530 --> 00:46:43,340 the mean of these factors. 638 00:46:45,930 --> 00:46:53,290 And if we make these particular assumptions, 639 00:46:53,290 --> 00:46:55,840 then the model does simplify to just 640 00:46:55,840 --> 00:47:02,400 being the covariance matrix sigma_x is the factor 641 00:47:02,400 --> 00:47:08,020 loadings B times its transpose plus a diagonal matrix. 642 00:47:08,020 --> 00:47:11,060 And just to reiterate, the power of this 643 00:47:11,060 --> 00:47:19,130 is basically no matter how large m is, as m increases 644 00:47:19,130 --> 00:47:28,004 the B matrix just increases by k for every increment in m. 645 00:47:28,004 --> 00:47:32,490 And we also have an additional diagonal entry on the psi. 646 00:47:32,490 --> 00:47:39,320 So as we add more and more assets to our modeling, 647 00:47:39,320 --> 00:47:42,660 the complexity basically doesn't increase very much. 648 00:47:51,720 --> 00:47:55,520 With all of our statistical models, one of the questions 649 00:47:55,520 --> 00:47:59,850 is how do we specify the particular parameters? 650 00:47:59,850 --> 00:48:05,930 Maximum likelihood estimation is the first thing to go through, 651 00:48:05,930 --> 00:48:12,050 and with normal linear factor models 652 00:48:12,050 --> 00:48:13,580 we have normal distributions for all 653 00:48:13,580 --> 00:48:16,890 the underlying random variables. 654 00:48:16,890 --> 00:48:19,755 So the residuals epsilon_t are independent 655 00:48:19,755 --> 00:48:23,970 and identically distributed, multivariate normal dimension m 656 00:48:23,970 --> 00:48:30,760 with diagonal matrix psi given by the individual elements' 657 00:48:30,760 --> 00:48:31,740 variances. 658 00:48:31,740 --> 00:48:36,950 f_t, the realization of the factors, 659 00:48:36,950 --> 00:48:40,490 the k-dimensional factors can have mean 0, 660 00:48:40,490 --> 00:48:43,970 and just to have the identity covariance 661 00:48:43,970 --> 00:48:48,550 we can scale them and make them uncorrelated. 662 00:48:48,550 --> 00:48:53,050 And then x_t will be normally distributed 663 00:48:53,050 --> 00:48:55,360 with mean alpha and covariance matrix 664 00:48:55,360 --> 00:48:59,210 sigma_x given by the formulas in the previous slide. 665 00:49:03,020 --> 00:49:05,370 With these assumptions, we can write down 666 00:49:05,370 --> 00:49:08,130 the model likelihood. 667 00:49:08,130 --> 00:49:10,440 The model likelihood is the joint density 668 00:49:10,440 --> 00:49:12,195 of our data given the unknown parameters. 669 00:49:22,670 --> 00:49:28,720 And the standard setup actually for statistical factor modeling 670 00:49:28,720 --> 00:49:31,290 is to assume independence over time. 671 00:49:31,290 --> 00:49:34,900 Now we know that there can be time series dependence. 672 00:49:34,900 --> 00:49:37,240 We won't deal with that at this point. 673 00:49:37,240 --> 00:49:41,340 Let's just assume that they are independent across time. 674 00:49:41,340 --> 00:49:46,280 Then we can consider this as simply the product 675 00:49:46,280 --> 00:49:51,570 of the conditional density of x_t given alpha and sigma, 676 00:49:51,570 --> 00:49:54,020 which has this form. 677 00:49:54,020 --> 00:50:00,120 This form for the density function of a multivariate 678 00:50:00,120 --> 00:50:05,210 normal should be very familiar to you at this point. 679 00:50:05,210 --> 00:50:07,950 It's basically the extension of the univariate normal 680 00:50:07,950 --> 00:50:10,010 distribution to m-variate. 681 00:50:10,010 --> 00:50:14,370 So we have 1 over the square root of pi to the m power. 682 00:50:14,370 --> 00:50:16,380 There are m components. 683 00:50:16,380 --> 00:50:23,170 And then we divide by the square root of the individual variance 684 00:50:23,170 --> 00:50:26,430 or the determinant of the covariance matrix. 685 00:50:26,430 --> 00:50:31,970 And then the exponential of this term here, 686 00:50:31,970 --> 00:50:41,370 which for the t-th case is a quadratic form in the x's. 687 00:50:41,370 --> 00:50:46,050 So this multivariate normal x, we take off its mean 688 00:50:46,050 --> 00:50:48,759 and look at the quadratic form of that with the inverse 689 00:50:48,759 --> 00:50:49,800 of its covariance matrix. 690 00:50:57,650 --> 00:50:59,660 So there's the log-likelihood function. 691 00:50:59,660 --> 00:51:06,400 It reduces to this form here. 692 00:51:06,400 --> 00:51:09,170 And maximum likelihood estimation methods 693 00:51:09,170 --> 00:51:16,550 can be applied to specify all the parameters of B and psi. 694 00:51:16,550 --> 00:51:23,620 And there's an EM algorithm, which is applied in this case. 695 00:51:23,620 --> 00:51:26,070 I think I may have highlighted it before, 696 00:51:26,070 --> 00:51:30,000 but the EM algorithm is a very powerful estimation methodology 697 00:51:30,000 --> 00:51:33,850 for maximum likelihood in statistics. 698 00:51:33,850 --> 00:51:40,520 When one has very complicated models which 699 00:51:40,520 --> 00:51:44,530 can be simplified-- well, models that are complicated 700 00:51:44,530 --> 00:51:47,830 by the fact that we have hidden variables-- basically 701 00:51:47,830 --> 00:51:51,760 the hidden variables lead to very complex likelihood 702 00:51:51,760 --> 00:51:54,550 functions. 703 00:51:54,550 --> 00:51:56,330 A simplification of the EM algorithm 704 00:51:56,330 --> 00:52:00,450 is that if we could observe some of the hidden variables, 705 00:52:00,450 --> 00:52:02,325 then our likelihood functions are very simple 706 00:52:02,325 --> 00:52:05,070 and can be computed directly. 707 00:52:05,070 --> 00:52:10,820 And the EM algorithm alternates estimating 708 00:52:10,820 --> 00:52:14,620 the hidden variables, assuming the hidden variables are known 709 00:52:14,620 --> 00:52:18,362 doing the simple estimates with the observed hidden variables, 710 00:52:18,362 --> 00:52:20,320 and then estimating the hidden variables again, 711 00:52:20,320 --> 00:52:22,860 and just iterating that process again and again. 712 00:52:22,860 --> 00:52:24,100 And it converges. 713 00:52:24,100 --> 00:52:26,460 And their paper demonstrates that this 714 00:52:26,460 --> 00:52:29,980 applies in many, many different application settings. 715 00:52:29,980 --> 00:52:33,610 And it's just a very, very powerful estimation methodology 716 00:52:33,610 --> 00:52:39,900 that is applied here with statistical factor analysis. 717 00:52:39,900 --> 00:52:45,460 I indicated that for now we could just assume independence 718 00:52:45,460 --> 00:52:49,970 over time of the data points in computing its likelihood. 719 00:52:49,970 --> 00:52:53,060 You recall our discussion a couple of lectures back 720 00:52:53,060 --> 00:52:57,260 about the state-space models, linear state-space models. 721 00:52:57,260 --> 00:53:00,710 Essentially, that linear state-space model framework 722 00:53:00,710 --> 00:53:03,830 can be applied here as well to incorporate time 723 00:53:03,830 --> 00:53:06,840 dependence in the data as well. 724 00:53:10,220 --> 00:53:16,190 So that simplification is not binding in terms of holding us 725 00:53:16,190 --> 00:53:17,970 up in estimating these models. 726 00:53:25,555 --> 00:53:28,320 Let me go back here, OK. 727 00:53:28,320 --> 00:53:32,160 So the maximum likelihood estimation process 728 00:53:32,160 --> 00:53:37,920 will give us estimates of the B matrix and the psi matrix. 729 00:53:37,920 --> 00:53:43,630 So applying this EM algorithm, a good computer 730 00:53:43,630 --> 00:53:51,880 can actually get estimates of B and psi and the underlying 731 00:53:51,880 --> 00:53:53,880 alpha, of course. 732 00:53:53,880 --> 00:54:03,660 Now from these we can estimate the factor realizations f_t. 733 00:54:03,660 --> 00:54:11,560 And these can be estimated by simply this regression formula, 734 00:54:11,560 --> 00:54:13,640 using our estimates for the factor loadings B 735 00:54:13,640 --> 00:54:17,720 hat, our estimates of alpha, we can actually 736 00:54:17,720 --> 00:54:20,540 estimate the factor realizations. 737 00:54:20,540 --> 00:54:24,390 So with statistical factor analysis, 738 00:54:24,390 --> 00:54:27,360 we use the EM algorithm to estimate the covariance matrix 739 00:54:27,360 --> 00:54:28,510 parameters. 740 00:54:28,510 --> 00:54:32,455 Then the next step, we can estimate the factor 741 00:54:32,455 --> 00:54:32,996 realizations. 742 00:54:37,240 --> 00:54:41,310 So as the output from factor analysis, 743 00:54:41,310 --> 00:54:45,830 we can work with these factor realizations. 744 00:54:45,830 --> 00:54:50,610 And those realizations or those estimates 745 00:54:50,610 --> 00:54:52,590 of the realizations of the factors 746 00:54:52,590 --> 00:55:00,570 can then be used basically for risk modeling as well. 747 00:55:00,570 --> 00:55:10,150 So we could do a statistical factor analysis of returns 748 00:55:10,150 --> 00:55:15,980 in, say, the commodities markets. 749 00:55:15,980 --> 00:55:21,610 And identify what factors are driving returns and covariances 750 00:55:21,610 --> 00:55:23,910 in commodity markets. 751 00:55:23,910 --> 00:55:26,120 We can then get estimates of those underlying 752 00:55:26,120 --> 00:55:29,570 factors from the methodology. 753 00:55:29,570 --> 00:55:32,610 We could then use those as inputs to other models. 754 00:55:32,610 --> 00:55:35,210 Certain stocks may depend on significant factors 755 00:55:35,210 --> 00:55:36,900 in the commodity markets. 756 00:55:36,900 --> 00:55:41,310 And what they depend on, well we can use statistical modeling 757 00:55:41,310 --> 00:55:44,880 to identify where the dependencies are. 758 00:55:44,880 --> 00:55:49,530 So getting these realizations of the statistical factors 759 00:55:49,530 --> 00:55:52,610 is very useful, not only to understand 760 00:55:52,610 --> 00:55:55,330 what happened in the past with the process 761 00:55:55,330 --> 00:55:57,030 and how these underlying factors vary, 762 00:55:57,030 --> 00:56:00,080 but you can also use those as inputs to other models. 763 00:56:11,770 --> 00:56:16,950 Finally, let's see, there was a lot 764 00:56:16,950 --> 00:56:19,050 of interest with statistical factor 765 00:56:19,050 --> 00:56:23,030 analysis on the interpretation of the underlying factors. 766 00:56:23,030 --> 00:56:28,320 Of course, in terms of using any model, 767 00:56:28,320 --> 00:56:32,460 it's once confidence rises when you have 768 00:56:32,460 --> 00:56:34,580 highly interpretable results. 769 00:56:34,580 --> 00:56:37,630 One of the initial applications of statistical factor analysis 770 00:56:37,630 --> 00:56:40,310 was in measuring IQ. 771 00:56:40,310 --> 00:56:45,070 And how many people here have taken an IQ test? 772 00:56:45,070 --> 00:56:47,580 Probably everybody or almost everybody? 773 00:56:47,580 --> 00:56:51,240 Well actually if you want to work for some hedge funds, 774 00:56:51,240 --> 00:56:54,690 you'll have to take some IQ tests. 775 00:56:54,690 --> 00:57:00,402 But basically in an IQ test there are 20, 30, 40 questions. 776 00:57:00,402 --> 00:57:02,360 And they're trying to measure different aspects 777 00:57:02,360 --> 00:57:04,630 of your ability. 778 00:57:04,630 --> 00:57:09,820 And statistical factor analysis has 779 00:57:09,820 --> 00:57:12,990 been used to try and understand what are the underlying 780 00:57:12,990 --> 00:57:14,930 dimensions of intelligence. 781 00:57:14,930 --> 00:57:21,930 And one has the flexibility of considering 782 00:57:21,930 --> 00:57:25,350 different transformations of any given 783 00:57:25,350 --> 00:57:30,290 set of estimated factors by this H matrix for transformation. 784 00:57:30,290 --> 00:57:35,230 And so there has been work in statistical factor analysis 785 00:57:35,230 --> 00:57:38,520 to find rotations of the factor loadings 786 00:57:38,520 --> 00:57:42,220 that make the factors more interpretable. 787 00:57:42,220 --> 00:57:48,650 So I just raise that as there's potential to get insight 788 00:57:48,650 --> 00:57:51,390 into these underlying factors if that's appropriate. 789 00:57:51,390 --> 00:57:54,100 In the IQ setting, the effort was actually 790 00:57:54,100 --> 00:57:57,979 to try and find what are interpretations 791 00:57:57,979 --> 00:57:59,645 of different dimensions of intelligence? 792 00:58:07,400 --> 00:58:10,940 We previously talked about factor mimicking portfolios. 793 00:58:10,940 --> 00:58:13,280 The same thing applies. 794 00:58:13,280 --> 00:58:18,460 One final thing is with likelihood ratio tests, 795 00:58:18,460 --> 00:58:23,700 one can test for whether the linear factor model is 796 00:58:23,700 --> 00:58:25,870 a good description of the data. 797 00:58:25,870 --> 00:58:29,950 And so with likelihood ratio tests, 798 00:58:29,950 --> 00:58:32,950 we compare the likelihood of the data 799 00:58:32,950 --> 00:58:36,650 where we fit our unknown parameters, the mean vector 800 00:58:36,650 --> 00:58:41,190 alpha and covariance matrix sigma, without any constraints. 801 00:58:41,190 --> 00:58:45,850 And then we compare that to the likelihood function 802 00:58:45,850 --> 00:58:50,070 under the factor model with, say, k factors. 803 00:58:50,070 --> 00:58:56,930 And the likelihood ratio tests are 804 00:58:56,930 --> 00:59:00,510 computed by looking at twice the difference in log likelihoods. 805 00:59:00,510 --> 00:59:04,710 If you take an advanced course in statistics, 806 00:59:04,710 --> 00:59:08,790 you'll see that basically this difference in the likelihood 807 00:59:08,790 --> 00:59:13,280 functions under many conditions is approximately a chi 808 00:59:13,280 --> 00:59:16,030 squared random variable with degrees 809 00:59:16,030 --> 00:59:18,030 of freedom equal to the difference in parameters 810 00:59:18,030 --> 00:59:20,070 under the two models. 811 00:59:20,070 --> 00:59:25,230 So that's why it's specified this way. 812 00:59:25,230 --> 00:59:29,035 But anyway, one can test for the dimensionality of the factor 813 00:59:29,035 --> 00:59:29,535 model. 814 00:59:33,940 --> 00:59:36,280 Before going into an example of factor modeling, 815 00:59:36,280 --> 00:59:39,890 I want to cover principal components analysis. 816 00:59:42,606 --> 00:59:44,230 Actually, principal components analysis 817 00:59:44,230 --> 00:59:46,990 comes up in factor modeling, but it's also 818 00:59:46,990 --> 00:59:52,700 a methodology that's appropriate for modeling multivariate data 819 00:59:52,700 --> 00:59:56,410 and considering dimensionality reduction. 820 00:59:56,410 --> 00:59:59,750 You're dealing with data in very many dimensions. 821 00:59:59,750 --> 01:00:05,680 You're wondering is there a simple characterization 822 01:00:05,680 --> 01:00:08,720 of the multivariate structure that lies 823 01:00:08,720 --> 01:00:10,770 in a smaller dimensional space? 824 01:00:10,770 --> 01:00:14,130 And principle components analysis gives us that. 825 01:00:14,130 --> 01:00:18,320 The theoretical framework for principal components analysis 826 01:00:18,320 --> 01:00:23,300 is to consider an m-variate random variable. 827 01:00:23,300 --> 01:00:27,650 So this is like a single realization of asset returns 828 01:00:27,650 --> 01:00:31,620 in a given time, which has some mean and covariance matrix 829 01:00:31,620 --> 01:00:32,120 sigma. 830 01:00:34,876 --> 01:00:36,250 The principal components analysis 831 01:00:36,250 --> 01:00:41,190 is going to exploit the eigenvalues and eigenvectors 832 01:00:41,190 --> 01:00:42,490 of the covariance matrix. 833 01:00:45,530 --> 01:00:50,320 Choongbum went through eigenvalues and singular value 834 01:00:50,320 --> 01:00:51,370 decompositions. 835 01:00:51,370 --> 01:00:55,640 So here we basically have the eigenvalue/eigenvector 836 01:00:55,640 --> 01:00:58,930 decomposition of our covariance matrix sigma, which 837 01:00:58,930 --> 01:01:04,700 is the scalar eigenvalues times the eigenvector 838 01:01:04,700 --> 01:01:08,270 gamma_i times its transpose. 839 01:01:08,270 --> 01:01:12,900 So we actually are able to decompose our covariance matrix 840 01:01:12,900 --> 01:01:15,450 with eigenvalues, eigenvectors. 841 01:01:15,450 --> 01:01:20,980 The principal component variables 842 01:01:20,980 --> 01:01:28,190 are to consider taking away the mean from the random vector x, 843 01:01:28,190 --> 01:01:29,390 alpha. 844 01:01:29,390 --> 01:01:35,800 And then consider the weighted average of those de-meaned x's 845 01:01:35,800 --> 01:01:39,630 given by the i-th eigenvector. 846 01:01:39,630 --> 01:01:42,210 So these are going to be called the principal component 847 01:01:42,210 --> 01:01:46,710 variables, where gamma_1 is the first one corresponding 848 01:01:46,710 --> 01:01:48,450 to the largest eigenvalue. 849 01:01:48,450 --> 01:01:51,609 Gamma m is going to be the m-th, or last, corresponding 850 01:01:51,609 --> 01:01:52,275 to the smallest. 851 01:01:59,690 --> 01:02:07,650 The properties of these principal component variables 852 01:02:07,650 --> 01:02:14,030 is that they have mean 0, and their covariance matrix 853 01:02:14,030 --> 01:02:17,610 is given by the diagonal matrix of eigenvalues. 854 01:02:17,610 --> 01:02:21,670 So the principal component variables 855 01:02:21,670 --> 01:02:25,210 are a very simple sort of affine transformation 856 01:02:25,210 --> 01:02:29,760 of the original variable x. 857 01:02:29,760 --> 01:02:38,450 We translate x to a new origin, basically to the 0 origin, 858 01:02:38,450 --> 01:02:41,260 by subtracting the means off it. 859 01:02:41,260 --> 01:02:46,710 And then we multiply that de-meaned x value 860 01:02:46,710 --> 01:02:51,335 by an orthogonal matrix gamma prime. 861 01:02:54,004 --> 01:02:54,920 And what does that do? 862 01:02:54,920 --> 01:02:59,450 That simply rotates the coordinate axes. 863 01:02:59,450 --> 01:03:04,330 So what we're doing is creating a new coordinate system 864 01:03:04,330 --> 01:03:07,860 for our data, which hasn't changed 865 01:03:07,860 --> 01:03:11,380 the relative position of the data or the random variable 866 01:03:11,380 --> 01:03:14,600 at all in the space. 867 01:03:14,600 --> 01:03:18,280 Basically, it just is using a new coordinate system 868 01:03:18,280 --> 01:03:22,389 with no change in the overall variability of what 869 01:03:22,389 --> 01:03:23,886 we're working with. 870 01:03:38,170 --> 01:03:46,350 In matrix form, we can express this principal component 871 01:03:46,350 --> 01:03:48,660 variables p. 872 01:03:51,540 --> 01:03:54,830 Let's consider partitioning p into the first k 873 01:03:54,830 --> 01:03:59,750 elements and the last m minus k elements p_2. 874 01:03:59,750 --> 01:04:05,463 Then our original random vector x has this decomposition. 875 01:04:09,320 --> 01:04:13,530 And we can think of this as being approximately 876 01:04:13,530 --> 01:04:14,850 a linear factor model. 877 01:04:19,790 --> 01:04:24,260 We can consider from principal components analysis 878 01:04:24,260 --> 01:04:26,720 essentially if p_1, the principle component variables, 879 01:04:26,720 --> 01:04:32,900 correspond to our factors, then our linear factor model 880 01:04:32,900 --> 01:04:37,940 would have B as given by gamma_1, F as given by p_1. 881 01:04:37,940 --> 01:04:42,400 And our epsilon vector would be given by gamma_2 p_2. 882 01:04:42,400 --> 01:04:45,110 So the principal components decomposition 883 01:04:45,110 --> 01:04:48,830 is almost a linear factor model. 884 01:04:48,830 --> 01:04:59,910 The only issue is this gamma_2 p_2 is an m-vector, 885 01:04:59,910 --> 01:05:06,340 but it may not have a diagonal covariance matrix. 886 01:05:06,340 --> 01:05:10,360 Under the linear factor model with a given set of factors 887 01:05:10,360 --> 01:05:12,630 k less than m, we always are assuming 888 01:05:12,630 --> 01:05:17,810 that the residual vector has covariance matrix 889 01:05:17,810 --> 01:05:19,140 equal to a diagonal. 890 01:05:19,140 --> 01:05:21,530 With a principal components analysis, 891 01:05:21,530 --> 01:05:25,810 that may or may not be true. 892 01:05:25,810 --> 01:05:29,870 So this is like an approximate factor model, 893 01:05:29,870 --> 01:05:32,540 but that's why this is called principal components analysis. 894 01:05:32,540 --> 01:05:35,792 It's not called principal factor analysis yet. 895 01:05:45,130 --> 01:05:49,870 The empirical principal components analysis now. 896 01:05:49,870 --> 01:05:51,870 We've gone through just a description 897 01:05:51,870 --> 01:05:54,670 of theoretical principal components, where 898 01:05:54,670 --> 01:05:58,454 if we have a mean vector alpha, covariance matrix sigma, how 899 01:05:58,454 --> 01:06:00,620 we would define these principle component variables. 900 01:06:00,620 --> 01:06:05,400 If we just have sample data, then this slide 901 01:06:05,400 --> 01:06:08,782 goes through the computations of the empirical principal 902 01:06:08,782 --> 01:06:09,970 components results. 903 01:06:09,970 --> 01:06:14,120 So all we're doing is substituting in estimates 904 01:06:14,120 --> 01:06:17,220 of the means and covariance matrix, 905 01:06:17,220 --> 01:06:19,110 and computing the eigenvalue/eigenvector 906 01:06:19,110 --> 01:06:21,060 decomposition of that. 907 01:06:21,060 --> 01:06:25,180 And we get sample principal component variables 908 01:06:25,180 --> 01:06:31,720 which are-- we basically compute x, the de-meaned vector, 909 01:06:31,720 --> 01:06:38,780 or matrix of realizations and pre-multiply that by gamma hat 910 01:06:38,780 --> 01:06:44,470 prime, which is the matrix of eigenvectors 911 01:06:44,470 --> 01:06:46,570 corresponding to the eigenvalue/eigenvector 912 01:06:46,570 --> 01:06:48,964 decomposition of the sample covariance matrix. 913 01:06:54,790 --> 01:06:59,960 This slide goes through the singular value decomposition. 914 01:06:59,960 --> 01:07:03,840 You don't have to go through and compute variances, covariances 915 01:07:03,840 --> 01:07:08,340 to derive estimates of the principal component variables. 916 01:07:08,340 --> 01:07:11,600 You can work simply with the singular value decomposition. 917 01:07:11,600 --> 01:07:15,804 I'll let you go through that on your own. 918 01:07:15,804 --> 01:07:18,220 There's an alternate definition of the principal component 919 01:07:18,220 --> 01:07:19,803 variable though that's very important. 920 01:07:27,270 --> 01:07:32,470 If we consider a linear combination 921 01:07:32,470 --> 01:07:40,850 of the components of x, x_1 through x_m, given by w, 922 01:07:40,850 --> 01:07:45,150 if we consider a linear combination of that which 923 01:07:45,150 --> 01:07:48,390 maximizes the variability of that linear combination 924 01:07:48,390 --> 01:07:56,040 subject to the norm of the coefficients w equals 1, 925 01:07:56,040 --> 01:08:00,340 then this is the first principal component variable. 926 01:08:00,340 --> 01:08:08,250 So if we have in two dimensions the x_1 and x_2, 927 01:08:08,250 --> 01:08:21,540 if we have points that look like an ellipsoidal distribution, 928 01:08:21,540 --> 01:08:28,850 this would correspond to having alpha 1 there, alpha 2 there, 929 01:08:28,850 --> 01:08:32,410 a sort of degree of variability. 930 01:08:32,410 --> 01:08:35,770 The principal components analysis 931 01:08:35,770 --> 01:08:42,620 says, let's shift to the origin being at (alpha_1, alpha_2). 932 01:08:42,620 --> 01:08:50,370 And then let's rotate the axes to align with the eigenvectors. 933 01:08:50,370 --> 01:08:54,170 Well the first principal component variable 934 01:08:54,170 --> 01:09:02,550 finds the dimension at which the coordinate axis at which 935 01:09:02,550 --> 01:09:04,800 the variability is a maximum. 936 01:09:04,800 --> 01:09:07,350 And basically along this dimension 937 01:09:07,350 --> 01:09:11,790 here, this is where the variability 938 01:09:11,790 --> 01:09:12,800 would be the maximum. 939 01:09:12,800 --> 01:09:15,529 And that's the first principal component variable. 940 01:09:15,529 --> 01:09:18,660 So this principal components analysis 941 01:09:18,660 --> 01:09:20,930 is identifying essentially where's 942 01:09:20,930 --> 01:09:23,620 there the most variability in the data, 943 01:09:23,620 --> 01:09:28,390 where it's the most variability without doing any change 944 01:09:28,390 --> 01:09:30,270 in the scaling of the data? 945 01:09:30,270 --> 01:09:33,816 All we're doing is shifting and rotating. 946 01:09:33,816 --> 01:09:35,649 Then the second principal component variable 947 01:09:35,649 --> 01:09:38,420 is basically the direction which is 948 01:09:38,420 --> 01:09:42,529 orthogonal to the first, which has the maximum variance. 949 01:09:42,529 --> 01:09:46,400 And continuing that process to define all 950 01:09:46,400 --> 01:09:48,160 m principal component variables. 951 01:09:56,780 --> 01:09:58,180 In principal components analysis, 952 01:09:58,180 --> 01:10:01,600 there's discussions of the total variability of the data 953 01:10:01,600 --> 01:10:05,460 and how well that's explained by principal components. 954 01:10:05,460 --> 01:10:09,030 If we have a covariance matrix sigma, 955 01:10:09,030 --> 01:10:13,390 the total variance can be defined 956 01:10:13,390 --> 01:10:17,960 and is defined as the sum of the diagonal entries. 957 01:10:17,960 --> 01:10:21,040 So it's the trace of a covariance matrix. 958 01:10:21,040 --> 01:10:25,220 We'll call that the total variance of this multivariate 959 01:10:25,220 --> 01:10:27,160 x. 960 01:10:27,160 --> 01:10:31,630 That is equal to the sum of the eigenvalues as well. 961 01:10:31,630 --> 01:10:36,520 So we have a decomposition of the total variability 962 01:10:36,520 --> 01:10:40,050 into the variability of different principal component 963 01:10:40,050 --> 01:10:42,070 variables. 964 01:10:42,070 --> 01:10:44,250 And the principal component variables 965 01:10:44,250 --> 01:10:48,459 themselves are uncorrelated. 966 01:10:48,459 --> 01:10:49,875 You remember the covariance matrix 967 01:10:49,875 --> 01:10:51,374 of the principal component variables 968 01:10:51,374 --> 01:10:56,750 was the lambda, the diagonal matrix of eigenvalues. 969 01:10:56,750 --> 01:11:00,060 So the off-diagonal entries are 0. 970 01:11:00,060 --> 01:11:01,590 So the principal component variables 971 01:11:01,590 --> 01:11:05,100 are uncorrelated, and have variability lambda_k, 972 01:11:05,100 --> 01:11:07,610 and basically decompose the variability. 973 01:11:07,610 --> 01:11:09,760 So principal components analysis provides 974 01:11:09,760 --> 01:11:14,140 this very nice decomposition of the data 975 01:11:14,140 --> 01:11:18,020 into different dimensions, with highest 976 01:11:18,020 --> 01:11:22,450 to lowest information content as given by the eigenvalues. 977 01:11:28,690 --> 01:11:34,140 I want to go through a case study 978 01:11:34,140 --> 01:11:41,295 here of doing factor modeling with the U.S. Treasury yields. 979 01:11:43,922 --> 01:11:49,040 I loaded in data into R, which ranged from the beginning 980 01:11:49,040 --> 01:11:54,280 of 2000 to the end of May 2013. 981 01:11:54,280 --> 01:11:58,750 And here are the yields on constant maturity U.S. Treasury 982 01:11:58,750 --> 01:12:01,100 securities ranging from 3 months, 6 months, 983 01:12:01,100 --> 01:12:03,050 up to 20 years. 984 01:12:03,050 --> 01:12:06,100 So this is essentially the term structure 985 01:12:06,100 --> 01:12:12,858 of US Government [INAUDIBLE] of varying levels of risk. 986 01:12:18,170 --> 01:12:25,292 Here's a plot of [INAUDIBLE] over that period. 987 01:12:33,148 --> 01:12:36,585 So starting in the [INAUDIBLE], we 988 01:12:36,585 --> 01:12:41,570 can see this, the rather dramatic evolution of the term 989 01:12:41,570 --> 01:12:44,891 structure over this entire period. 990 01:12:44,891 --> 01:12:47,320 If we wanted to have set any [INAUDIBLE]. 991 01:12:52,732 --> 01:12:55,190 If we wanted to do a principal components analysis of this, 992 01:12:55,190 --> 01:12:57,900 well if we did the entire period we'd 993 01:12:57,900 --> 01:13:01,040 be measuring variability of all kinds of things. 994 01:13:01,040 --> 01:13:03,580 When things go down, up, down. 995 01:13:03,580 --> 01:13:07,380 What I've done in this note is just initially 996 01:13:07,380 --> 01:13:15,750 to look at the period from 2001 up through 2005. 997 01:13:15,750 --> 01:13:20,620 So we have five years of data on basically the early part 998 01:13:20,620 --> 01:13:23,380 of this period that I want to focus on and do 999 01:13:23,380 --> 01:13:32,340 a principal components analysis of the yields on this data. 1000 01:13:32,340 --> 01:13:40,845 So here's basically the series over that five year period. 1001 01:13:44,470 --> 01:13:47,110 Beginning of this analysis, this analysis 1002 01:13:47,110 --> 01:13:50,590 is on the actual yield changes. 1003 01:13:50,590 --> 01:13:53,940 So just as we might be modeling say asset prices over time 1004 01:13:53,940 --> 01:13:58,515 and then doing an analysis of the changes, the returns, 1005 01:13:58,515 --> 01:14:00,015 here we're looking at yield changes. 1006 01:14:07,080 --> 01:14:12,000 So first, you can see there's-- basically, 1007 01:14:12,000 --> 01:14:17,170 the average daily value for the different yield tenors ranging 1008 01:14:17,170 --> 01:14:20,250 from 3 months up to 20, those are actually all negative. 1009 01:14:20,250 --> 01:14:24,360 That corresponds to the time series over that five year 1010 01:14:24,360 --> 01:14:25,160 period. 1011 01:14:25,160 --> 01:14:29,480 Basically the time series were all at lower levels 1012 01:14:29,480 --> 01:14:31,800 from beginning to end on average. 1013 01:14:31,800 --> 01:14:36,400 The daily volatility is the daily standard deviation. 1014 01:14:36,400 --> 01:14:42,590 Those vary from 0.0384 up to .0698 1015 01:14:42,590 --> 01:14:45,650 for-- is that the three year? 1016 01:14:45,650 --> 01:14:49,920 And this is the standard deviation of daily yield 1017 01:14:49,920 --> 01:14:55,650 changes where 1 is like 1%. 1018 01:14:55,650 --> 01:15:02,310 And so basically it's between three and six basis 1019 01:15:02,310 --> 01:15:05,407 points a day are the variation in the yield changes. 1020 01:15:05,407 --> 01:15:06,990 So that's something that's reasonable. 1021 01:15:06,990 --> 01:15:10,720 When you look at the news or a newspaper 1022 01:15:10,720 --> 01:15:13,520 and see how interest rates change from one day 1023 01:15:13,520 --> 01:15:15,780 to the next, it's generally a few basis points 1024 01:15:15,780 --> 01:15:17,250 from one day to the next. 1025 01:15:20,680 --> 01:15:26,560 This next matrix is the correlation matrix 1026 01:15:26,560 --> 01:15:27,885 of the yield changes. 1027 01:15:30,440 --> 01:15:32,650 If you look at this closely, which 1028 01:15:32,650 --> 01:15:38,480 you can when you download these results, 1029 01:15:38,480 --> 01:15:42,310 you'll see that near the diagonal 1030 01:15:42,310 --> 01:15:47,870 the values are very high, like above 90% for correlation. 1031 01:15:47,870 --> 01:15:51,930 And as you move across, away from the diagonal, 1032 01:15:51,930 --> 01:15:53,918 the correlations get lower and lower. 1033 01:15:58,180 --> 01:16:02,870 Mathematically that is what is happening. 1034 01:16:02,870 --> 01:16:05,800 We can look at these things graphically, which I always 1035 01:16:05,800 --> 01:16:06,810 like to do. 1036 01:16:06,810 --> 01:16:11,840 Here is just a graph, a bar chart of the yield changes 1037 01:16:11,840 --> 01:16:14,290 and the standard deviations of the yield 1038 01:16:14,290 --> 01:16:18,910 changes, daily volatilities ranging from very short yields 1039 01:16:18,910 --> 01:16:22,020 to long-tenor yields, up to 20 years. 1040 01:16:25,956 --> 01:16:28,416 So there's variability there. 1041 01:16:35,840 --> 01:16:40,500 Here is a pairs plot of the data. 1042 01:16:40,500 --> 01:16:45,460 So what I've done is just looked at basically 1043 01:16:45,460 --> 01:16:50,390 for every single tenor, this is say the 5 year, 7 year, 1044 01:16:50,390 --> 01:16:53,015 10 year, 20 year. 1045 01:16:53,015 --> 01:16:55,970 I basically plotted the yield changes 1046 01:16:55,970 --> 01:16:57,800 of each of those against each other. 1047 01:16:57,800 --> 01:17:01,245 We could do this with basically all nine different tenors, 1048 01:17:01,245 --> 01:17:08,690 and we'd have a very dense page of a pairs plot. 1049 01:17:08,690 --> 01:17:10,950 So I split it up into looking just 1050 01:17:10,950 --> 01:17:14,890 at the top and bottom block diagonals. 1051 01:17:14,890 --> 01:17:18,000 But you can see basically how the correlation 1052 01:17:18,000 --> 01:17:23,190 between these yield changes is very tight 1053 01:17:23,190 --> 01:17:26,110 and then gets less tight as you move further away. 1054 01:17:26,110 --> 01:17:33,250 With the long tenors-- let's see, 1055 01:17:33,250 --> 01:17:39,030 the short tenors-- one, one more. 1056 01:17:39,030 --> 01:17:44,070 Here the short tenors, ranging from 3 year, 2 year, 1 year, 1057 01:17:44,070 --> 01:17:45,240 6 month, and so forth. 1058 01:17:45,240 --> 01:17:48,660 So here you can see how it gets less and less correlated 1059 01:17:48,660 --> 01:17:50,950 as you move away from a given tenor. 1060 01:17:53,730 --> 01:17:58,100 Well the principal components analysis 1061 01:17:58,100 --> 01:18:11,700 gives us-- if you conduct a principal components, 1062 01:18:11,700 --> 01:18:14,200 basically the standard output is first 1063 01:18:14,200 --> 01:18:18,610 a table of how the variability of the series 1064 01:18:18,610 --> 01:18:22,210 is broken down across the different component variables. 1065 01:18:22,210 --> 01:18:24,990 And so there's basically the importance 1066 01:18:24,990 --> 01:18:29,640 of components for each of the nine component variables 1067 01:18:29,640 --> 01:18:36,260 where it's measured in terms of the relative squared 1068 01:18:36,260 --> 01:18:41,140 standard deviations of these variables relative to the sum. 1069 01:18:41,140 --> 01:18:43,400 And the proportion of variance explained 1070 01:18:43,400 --> 01:18:47,030 by the first component variable is 0.849. 1071 01:18:47,030 --> 01:18:50,300 So basically 85% of the total variability 1072 01:18:50,300 --> 01:18:54,000 is explained by the first principal component variable. 1073 01:18:54,000 --> 01:18:57,990 Looking at the second row, second in, 0.0919, 1074 01:18:57,990 --> 01:19:02,042 that's the percentage of total variability 1075 01:19:02,042 --> 01:19:04,250 explained by the second principal component variable. 1076 01:19:04,250 --> 01:19:05,700 So 9%. 1077 01:19:05,700 --> 01:19:08,920 And then for third it's around 3%. 1078 01:19:08,920 --> 01:19:20,940 And it just goes down closer to 0, 1079 01:19:20,940 --> 01:19:23,800 There's a scree plot for principal components analysis, 1080 01:19:23,800 --> 01:19:26,352 which is just a plot of the variability 1081 01:19:26,352 --> 01:19:28,310 of the different principal component variables. 1082 01:19:28,310 --> 01:19:34,510 So you can see whether the principal components 1083 01:19:34,510 --> 01:19:37,830 is explaining much variability in the first few components 1084 01:19:37,830 --> 01:19:38,350 or not. 1085 01:19:38,350 --> 01:19:41,280 Here there's a huge amount of variability 1086 01:19:41,280 --> 01:19:43,910 explained by the first principal component variable. 1087 01:19:43,910 --> 01:19:47,930 I've plotted here the standard deviations 1088 01:19:47,930 --> 01:19:50,616 of the original yield changes in green, 1089 01:19:50,616 --> 01:19:52,990 versus the standard deviations of the principal component 1090 01:19:52,990 --> 01:19:55,620 variables in blue. 1091 01:19:55,620 --> 01:20:02,090 So we basically are modeling with principal component 1092 01:20:02,090 --> 01:20:03,900 variables most of the variability 1093 01:20:03,900 --> 01:20:06,620 in the first few principal components. 1094 01:20:06,620 --> 01:20:08,489 Now let's look at the interpretation 1095 01:20:08,489 --> 01:20:10,030 of the principal component variables. 1096 01:20:10,030 --> 01:20:12,400 There's the loadings matrix, which 1097 01:20:12,400 --> 01:20:16,280 is the gamma matrix for the principal components variables. 1098 01:20:19,440 --> 01:20:25,200 Looking at numbers is less informative for me 1099 01:20:25,200 --> 01:20:26,160 than looking at graphs. 1100 01:20:26,160 --> 01:20:30,620 Here's a plot of the loadings on the different yield 1101 01:20:30,620 --> 01:20:34,070 changes for the first principal component variable. 1102 01:20:34,070 --> 01:20:36,120 So the first principal component variable 1103 01:20:36,120 --> 01:20:39,760 is a weighted average of all the yield changes, 1104 01:20:39,760 --> 01:20:44,690 giving greatest weight to the five year. 1105 01:20:44,690 --> 01:20:45,210 What's that? 1106 01:20:45,210 --> 01:20:51,220 Well that's just a measure of a level shift in the yield curve. 1107 01:20:51,220 --> 01:20:52,750 It's like, what's the average yield 1108 01:20:52,750 --> 01:20:55,747 change across the whole range? 1109 01:20:55,747 --> 01:20:57,580 So that's what the first principal component 1110 01:20:57,580 --> 01:20:59,720 variable is measuring. 1111 01:20:59,720 --> 01:21:03,440 The second principal component variable gives positive weight 1112 01:21:03,440 --> 01:21:07,250 to the long tenors, negative weight to the short tenors. 1113 01:21:07,250 --> 01:21:11,540 So it's looking at the difference between the yield 1114 01:21:11,540 --> 01:21:13,920 changes on the long tenors verses the yield 1115 01:21:13,920 --> 01:21:15,610 change on the short tenors. 1116 01:21:15,610 --> 01:21:19,774 So that's looking at how the spread in yields is changing. 1117 01:21:27,090 --> 01:21:32,250 Then the third principal component variable 1118 01:21:32,250 --> 01:21:36,190 has this structure. 1119 01:21:36,190 --> 01:21:38,780 And this structure for the weights 1120 01:21:38,780 --> 01:21:40,050 is like a double difference. 1121 01:21:40,050 --> 01:21:44,570 It's looking at the difference between the long tenor 1122 01:21:44,570 --> 01:21:48,150 and medium tenor, minus the medium tenor, 1123 01:21:48,150 --> 01:21:50,710 minus the short tenor. 1124 01:21:50,710 --> 01:21:54,100 So that's giving us a measure of the curvature of the term 1125 01:21:54,100 --> 01:21:57,440 structure and how that's changing over time. 1126 01:21:57,440 --> 01:21:59,350 So these principal component variables 1127 01:21:59,350 --> 01:22:01,600 are measuring the level shift for the first, 1128 01:22:01,600 --> 01:22:04,710 the spread for the second, and the curvature for the third. 1129 01:22:07,350 --> 01:22:09,250 With principal components analysis, 1130 01:22:09,250 --> 01:22:11,879 many times I think people focus just 1131 01:22:11,879 --> 01:22:14,170 on the first few principal component variables and then 1132 01:22:14,170 --> 01:22:16,480 say they're done. 1133 01:22:16,480 --> 01:22:19,137 The last principle component variable, and the last few, 1134 01:22:19,137 --> 01:22:20,720 can be very, very interesting as well, 1135 01:22:20,720 --> 01:22:27,640 because these are the variables of the original scales, 1136 01:22:27,640 --> 01:22:33,420 the linear combinations which have the least variability. 1137 01:22:33,420 --> 01:22:35,760 And if you look at the ninth principle component 1138 01:22:35,760 --> 01:22:37,500 variable-- there were nine yield changes 1139 01:22:37,500 --> 01:22:43,810 here-- it's basically looking at a weighted average of the 5 1140 01:22:43,810 --> 01:22:47,580 and 10 year minus the 7 year. 1141 01:22:47,580 --> 01:22:53,240 So this is like the hedge of the 7 year yield with the 5 and 10 1142 01:22:53,240 --> 01:22:53,739 year. 1143 01:22:56,910 --> 01:23:00,600 So that difference in yield change 1144 01:23:00,600 --> 01:23:03,005 is-- that combination of yield change 1145 01:23:03,005 --> 01:23:04,630 is going to have the least variability. 1146 01:23:07,310 --> 01:23:08,720 The principal component variables 1147 01:23:08,720 --> 01:23:10,860 have zero correlation. 1148 01:23:10,860 --> 01:23:14,840 Here's just a pairs plot of the first three principal component 1149 01:23:14,840 --> 01:23:16,010 variables and the ninth. 1150 01:23:16,010 --> 01:23:18,670 And you can see that those have been 1151 01:23:18,670 --> 01:23:22,240 transformed to have zero correlations with each other. 1152 01:23:24,750 --> 01:23:31,540 One can plot the cumulative principal component variables 1153 01:23:31,540 --> 01:23:35,570 over time to see how the evolution of these underlying 1154 01:23:35,570 --> 01:23:38,820 factors has changed over the time period. 1155 01:23:38,820 --> 01:23:42,300 And you'll recall that we talked about the first 1156 01:23:42,300 --> 01:23:43,720 being the level shift. 1157 01:23:43,720 --> 01:23:49,750 Basically from 2001 to 2005, the overall level of interest rates 1158 01:23:49,750 --> 01:23:51,150 went down and then went up. 1159 01:23:51,150 --> 01:23:54,030 And this is captured by this first principal component 1160 01:23:54,030 --> 01:24:00,770 variable accumulating from 0 down to minus 8, back up to 0. 1161 01:24:06,170 --> 01:24:11,920 And the scale of this change from 0 to minus 8 1162 01:24:11,920 --> 01:24:16,270 is the amount of greatest variability. 1163 01:24:16,270 --> 01:24:19,340 The second principal component variable 1164 01:24:19,340 --> 01:24:24,130 accumulates from 0 up to less than 6, back down to 0. 1165 01:24:24,130 --> 01:24:27,092 So this is a measure of the spread 1166 01:24:27,092 --> 01:24:28,300 between long and short rates. 1167 01:24:28,300 --> 01:24:31,470 So the spread increased, and then it 1168 01:24:31,470 --> 01:24:33,805 decreased over the period. 1169 01:24:39,700 --> 01:24:46,560 And then the curvature, it varies from 0 down to minus 1.5 1170 01:24:46,560 --> 01:24:47,560 back up to 0. 1171 01:24:47,560 --> 01:24:50,590 So how the curvature changed over this entire period 1172 01:24:50,590 --> 01:24:57,260 was much, much less, which is perhaps as it should be. 1173 01:24:57,260 --> 01:24:59,170 But these graphs indicate basically 1174 01:24:59,170 --> 01:25:03,710 how these underlying factors evolved over the time period. 1175 01:25:03,710 --> 01:25:10,410 In the case note I go through and fit a statistical factor 1176 01:25:10,410 --> 01:25:13,600 analysis model to these same data 1177 01:25:13,600 --> 01:25:16,980 and look at identifying the number of factors. 1178 01:25:16,980 --> 01:25:19,970 And also comparing the results over this five year period 1179 01:25:19,970 --> 01:25:24,030 with the period from 2009 to 2013, 1180 01:25:24,030 --> 01:25:27,330 and comparing those different results. 1181 01:25:27,330 --> 01:25:29,970 They are different, and so it really 1182 01:25:29,970 --> 01:25:33,890 matters over what period one specifies these models to. 1183 01:25:33,890 --> 01:25:37,620 And fitting these models is really just a starting point 1184 01:25:37,620 --> 01:25:41,490 where you want to ultimately model 1185 01:25:41,490 --> 01:25:44,450 the dynamics in these factors and their structural 1186 01:25:44,450 --> 01:25:47,150 relationships. 1187 01:25:47,150 --> 01:25:49,000 So we'll finish there.