SSRN Id3466904

LISA SCHOPOHL
ROBERT WICHMANN
CHRIS BROOKS
STATA GUIDE TO ACCOMPANY

INTRODUCTORY
ECONOMETRICS
FOR FINANCE
4TH EDITION
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3466904

c Lisa Schopohl, Robert Wichmann and Chris Brooks, 2019
The ICMA Centre, Henley Business School, University of Reading
All rights reserved.
This guide draws on material from ‘Introductory Econometrics for Finance’, published by Cambridge
University Press,
c Chris Brooks (2019). The Guide is intended to be used alongside the book, and
page numbers from the book are given after each section and subsection heading.
The authors accept no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party
internet websites referred to in this work, and nor do we guarantee that any content on such web sites
is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
i
Contents
1 Getting Started 1
1.1 What is Stata? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 What Does Stata Look Like? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Getting Help . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Data Management 5
2.1 Variables and Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Formats and Variable Labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3 Data Input and Saving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4 Data Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.5 Changing Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.6 Generating New Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.7 Plots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.8 Keeping Track of Your Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.9 Saving Data and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3 Linear Regression – Estimation of an Optimal Hedge Ratio 19
4 Hypothesis Testing – Example 1: Hedging Revisited 26
5 Hypothesis Testing – Example 2: The CAPM 29
6 Sample Output for Multiple Hypothesis Tests 34
7 Multiple Regression Using an APT-Style Model 35

7.1 Stepwise Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
8 Quantile Regression 40
9 Calculating Principal Components 45
10 Diagnostic Testing 48
10.1 Testing for Heteroscedasticity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
10.2 Using White’s Modified Standard Error Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
10.3 The Newey–West Procedure for Estimating Standard Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
10.4 Autocorrelation and Dynamic Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
10.5 Testing for Non-Normality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
10.6 Dummy Variable Construction and Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
10.7 Multicollinearity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
10.8 The RESET Test for Functional Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
10.9 Stability Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
11 Constructing ARMA Models 70

11.1 Estimating Autocorrelation Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
11.2 Using Information Criteria to Decide on Model Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
12 Forecasting Using ARMA Models 78
13 Estimating Exponential Smoothing Models 82
i
14 Simultaneous Equations Modelling 83
15 The Generalised Method of Moments 87

15.1 OLS as a Special Case of GMM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
16 Vector Autoregressive (VAR) Models 91
17 Testing for Unit Roots 100
18 Cointegration Tests and Modelling Cointegrated Systems 104

18.1 The Johansen Test for Cointegration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
19 Volatility Modelling 116

19.1 Testing for ‘ARCH Effects’ in Exchange Rate Returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
19.2 Estimating GARCH Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
19.3 GJR and EGARCH Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
19.4 GARCH-M Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
19.5 Forecasting from GARCH Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
19.6 Estimation of Multivariate GARCH Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
20 Modelling Seasonality in Financial Data 129

20.1 Dummy Variables for Seasonality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
20.2 Estimating Markov Switching Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
21 Panel Data Models 134

21.1 Testing for Unit Roots and Cointegration in Panels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
22 Limited Dependent Variable Models 145
23 Simulation Methods 154

23.1 Deriving Critical Values for a Dickey–Fuller Test Using Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
23.2 Pricing Asian Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
24 Value at Risk 162

24.1 Extreme Value Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
24.2 The Hill Estimator for Extreme Value Distributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
24.3 VaR Estimation Using Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
25 The Fama–MacBeth Procedure 168
References 173
ii
List of Figures
1 The Stata Main Windows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2 Importing Excel Data into Stata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3 Generating Summary Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4 Renaming Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5 Generating a Monthly Date Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6 The Variables Manager Window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7 Changing the Format Type for a Monthly Date Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8 Declaring Your Dataset to be Time-Series Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9 Generating Simple Percentage Changes in House Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10 Creating a Line Plot of the Average House Price Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11 Line Plot of the Average House Price Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12 Creating a Histogram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
13 Importing Time-Series Data into Stata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
14 Changing the Unit of Date Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
15 Variables Manager for S&P Dataset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
16 Variable Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
17 Declare Dataset to be Time-Series Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
18 Computing Continuously Compounded Returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
19 Generating Summary Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
20 Estimating OLS Regressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
21 Postestimation Selector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
22 Specifying the Wald Linear Hypothesis Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
23 Generating Continuously Compounded Returns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
24 Generating a Time-Series Plot of Two Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
25 Time-Series Plot of Two Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
26 Generating a Scatter Plot of Two Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
27 Estimating the CAPM Regression Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
28 Multiple Hypothesis Test for APT-Style Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
29 Stepwise Procedure Equation Estimation Window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
30 Quantile Regression Specification Window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
31 Specifying Simultaneous Quantile Regressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
32 Equality of Quantile Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
33 Import Variables from the FRED Data Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
34 Principal Component Analysis Specification Window . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
35 Postestimation Selector for Predictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
36 Obtaining Residuals after Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
37 Time-Series Plot of Residuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
38 Specification Window for Heteroscedasticity Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
39 Adjusting Standard Errors for OLS Regressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
40 Specifiying Regressions with Newey–West Standard Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
41 Postestimation Selector for the Durbin-Watson Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
42 Generating a Histogram of Residuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
43 Specifying the Normality Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
44 Generating a Series of Fitted Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
45 Regression Residuals and Fitted Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
46 Sorting Data by Values of Residuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
47 Creating a Dummy Variable for Outliers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
iii
48 Generating a Correlation Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
49 Specifying the RESET Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
50 Specifying a Test for Structural Breaks with a Known Break Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
51 Specifying a Test for Structural Breaks with an Unknown Break Date . . . . . . . . . . . 64
52 Specifying Recursive Regressions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
53 Generating a Plot for the Parameter Stability Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
54 Plot of the Parameter Stability Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
55 CUSUM Test for Parameter Stability Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
56 CUSUM Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
57 Generating a Correlogram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
58 Specifying an ARMA(1,1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
59 Generating Information Criteria for the ARMA(1,1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
60 Testing the Stability Condition for the ARMA(1,1) Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
63 Restricting the Sample to the Subperiod 1991m2 - 2015m12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
64 Postestimation Selector to Generate Predictions Based on an ARMA Model . . . . . . . 79
65 Generating Static and Dynamic Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
66 Graph Comparing the Static and Dynamic Forecasts with the Actual Series . . . . . . . . 81
67 Specifying an Exponential Smoothing Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
68 Specifying the 2SLS Model for the Inflation (left) and Returns (right) Equation . . . . . 84
69 Specifying the Instrumental Variables Approach with GMM Estimator . . . . . . . . . . 87
70 Estimating the CAPM Using the Generalised Method of Moments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
71 Estimating the CAPM Using the Generalised Method of Moments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
72 Specifying a VAR Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
73 Selecting the VAR Lag Order Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
74 Generating Impulse Responses for the VAR(1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
75 Graphs of Impulse Response Functions (IRFs) for the VAR(1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . 96
76 Graphs of FEVDs for the VAR(1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
77 Generating FEVDs for an Alternative Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
78 Graphs for FEVDs with an Alternative Ordering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
79 Specifying an Augmented Dickey–Fuller Test for Unit Roots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
80 Specifying the Dickey–Fuller GLS Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
81 Actual, Fitted and Residual Plot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
82 Graph of the Six U.S. Treasury Interest Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
83 Specifying the Lag-Order Selection Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
84 Testing for the Number of Cointegrating Relationships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
85 Specifying the VECM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
86 Defining Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
87 VECM Specification with Constraints and One Cointegrating Equation . . . . . . . . . . 114
88 Testing for ARCH Effects Using Engle’s Lagrange Multiplier Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
89 Specifying a GARCH(1,1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
90 Optional Settings for a GARCH(1,1) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
91 Estimating the EGARCH Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
92 Estimating the GJR Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
93 Specifying a GARCH-M model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
94 Generating Static Forecasts of the Conditional Variance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
95 Generating Dynamic Forecasts of the Conditional Variances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
96 Graph of the Static and Dynamic Forecasts of the Conditional Variance . . . . . . . . . . 125
iv
97 Specifying a Multivariate GARCH Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
98 Specifying the Estimation Equation for a Multivariate GARCH Model . . . . . . . . . . . 127
99 Specifying a Markov Switching Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
100 Generating a Table of Transition Probabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
101 Generating Smoothed State Probabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
102 State Probabilities Graph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
103 Transforming String Variables into Numeric Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
104 Declaring a Dataset to be Panel Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
105 Specifying a Fixed Effects Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
106 Storing Estimates from the Fixed Effects Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
107 Specifying the Hausman test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
108 Reshaping the Dataset into a Panel Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
109 Encoding the Panel Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
110 Specifying a Panel Unit Root Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
111 Specifying a Logit Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
112 Specifying Standard Errors for a Logit Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
113 Creating Fitted Values from the Failure Probit Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
114 Graph of the Fitted Values from the Failure Probit Regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
115 Generating a Classification Table for the Probit Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
116 Generating Marginal Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
117 Hill Plot for Value at Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
v
List of Tables
1 Commonly Used Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2 Information Criteria for ARMA(p,q) Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
3 Simulated Critical Values for a Dickey–Fuller Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
4 Simulated Asian Option Prices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
5 Fama–MacBeth Market Prices of Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
vi
1 Getting Started
1.1 What is Stata?
Stata is a statistical package for managing, analysing, and graphing data.1 Stata’s main strengths are
handling and manipulating large datasets, and its ever-growing capabilities for handling panel and time-
series regression analysis. Besides its wealth of diagnostic tests and estimation routines, one feature that
makes Stata a very suitable econometrics software package for both novices and experts of econometric
analyses is that it may be used either as a point-and-click application or as a command-driven package.
Stata’s graphical user interface provides an easy interface for those new to Stata and for experienced
Stata users who wish to execute a command that they seldom use. The command language provides
a fast way to communicate with Stata and to implement more complex ideas. In this guide we will
primarily be working with the graphical user interface. However, we also provide the corresponding
command language, where suitable.
This guide is based on Stata 15.1. Please note that if you use an earlier version of Stata, the design
of the specification windows as well as certain features of the menu structure might differ. As different
statistical software packages might use different algorithms for some of their estimation techniques, the
results generated by Stata might not be comparable to those generated by EViews in each instance.
A good way of familiarising yourself with Stata is to learn about its main menus and their relation-
ships through the examples given in this guide.
This section assumes that readers have a licensed copy of Stata and have successfully loaded it onto
an available computer. There now follows a description of the Stata package, together with instructions
to achieve standard tasks and sample output. Any instructions that must be entered or icons to be
clicked are illustrated by bold-faced type. Note that Stata is case-sensitive. Thus, it is important
to enter commands in lower-case and to refer to variables as they were originally defined, i.e., either as
lower-case or CAPITAL letters.
1.2 What Does Stata Look Like?

When you open Stata, you will be presented with the Stata main window, which should resemble
Figure 1. You will soon realise that the main window is actually sub-divided into several smaller windows.
The five most important windows are the Review, Output, Command, Variables, and Properties windows
(as indicated in Figure 1). This subsection briefly describes the characteristics and main functions of
each window. There are other, more specialized windows such as the Viewer, Data Editor, Variables
Manager, and Do-file Editor – which are discussed later in this guide.2
1
This subsection is based on the description provided in the Stata manual [U] User’s Guide.
2
This section is based on the Stata manual [GS] Getting Started. The intention of this subsection is to provide a
brief overview of the main windows and features of Stata. If you would like a more detailed introduction to Stata’s user
interface, refer to Chapter 2, The Stata User Interface, in the above-mentioned manual.
1
Figure 1: The Stata Main Windows
The Variables window to the right shows the list of variables in the dataset, along with selected properties
of the variables. By default, it shows all the variables and their labels. You can change the properties
that are displayed by right-clicking on the header of any column of the Variables window.
Below the Variables window you will find the Properties window. It displays variable and dataset
properties. If you select a single variable in the Variables window, this is where its properties are
displayed. If there are multiple variables selected in the Variables window, the Properties window will
display properties that are common across all selected variables.
Commands are submitted to Stata via the Command window. Assuming you know what command
you would like to use, just type it into the command window and press Enter to execute it. When a
command is executed – with or without error – the output of that command (e.g., the table of summary
statistics or the estimation output) appears in the Output window. It contains all the commands that you
have entered during the Stata session and their textual results. Note that the output of a particular test
or command shown in the Results window does not differ depending on whether you use the command
language or the point-and-click menu to execute it.
Besides being able to see the output of your commands in the Output window, the command line
will also appear in the Review window at the left-hand side of the main window. The Review window
shows the history of all commands that have been entered during one session. Note that it displays
successfully executed commands in black and unsuccessful commands – along with their error codes –
in red. You may click on any command in the Review window and it will reappear in the Command
window, where you can edit and/or resubmit it.
The different windows are interlinked. For instance, by double-clicking on a variable in the Variables
window you can send it to the Command window or you can adjust or re-run certain commands you
have previously executed using the Review window.
There are two ways by which you can tell Stata what you would like it to do: you can directly
type the instruction into the Command window or you can use the click-and-point menu. Access to
the click-and-point menu can be found at the top left of the Stata main window. You will find that
2
the menu is divided into several subcategories based on the features they comprise: File, Edit, Data,
Graphics, Statistics, User, Window, and Help.
The File menu icon comprises features to open, import, export, print, or save your data. Under
the Data icon, you can find commands to explore and manage data as well as functions to create or
change variables or single observations, to sort data or to merge datasets. The Graphics icon is relatively
self-explanatory as it covers all features related to creating and formatting graphics in Stata. Under the
Statistics icon, you can find all the commands and functions to create customised summary statistics
and to run estimations. You can also find post-estimation options and commands to run diagnostic
(misspecification) tests. Another useful icon is the Help icon under which you can get access to the
Stata pdf manual as well as other help and search features.
When accessing certain features through the Stata menu (usually) a new dialogue window appears
where you are asked to specify the task you would like Stata to perform.
Below the menu icons we find the Toolbar. The Toolbar contains buttons that provide quick access
to Stata’s more commonly used features. If you forget what a button does, hold the mouse pointer over
the button for a moment, and a tool-tip will appear with a description of that button. In the following,
we will focus on those toolbar buttons of particular interest to us.
The Log button begins a new log or closes, suspends, or resumes the current log. Logs are used to
document the results of your session – more on this issue in subsection 2.8 – Keeping Track of Your
Work.
The Do-file Editor opens a new do-file or re-opens a previously stored do-file. Do-files are mainly
used for programming in Stata but can also be handy to store a set of commands in order to allow you
to replicate certain analyses at a later point in time. We will discuss the use of do-files and programming
Stata in more detail in later sections.
There are two icons to open the Data Editor. The Data Editor gives a spreadsheet-like view of the
data. The icon resembling a spreadsheet with a loop opens the Data Editor in the Browse-mode while
the spreadsheet-like icon with the pen opens the editor in the Edit-mode. The former only allows you
to inspect the data. In the edit mode, however, you can make changes to the data, e.g., overwriting
certain data points or dropping observations.
Finally, there are two icons at the very right of the toolbar: a green downward-facing arrow and a
red sign with a cross. The former is the Clear–more–Condition icon which tells Stata to continue when
it has paused in the middle of a long output. The latter is the Break icon and pressing it while Stata
executes a command stops the current task.
1.3 Getting Help

There are several different ways to get help when using Stata.3 Firstly, Stata has a very detailed set
of manuals which provide several tutorials to explore some of the software’s functionalities. Especially
when getting started using Stata, it might be useful to follow some of the examples provided in the
Stata pdf manuals. These manuals come with the package but can also be directly accessed via the
Stata software by clicking on the Help icon in the icon menu. There are separate manuals for different
subtopics, e.g., for graphics, data management, panel data, etc. There is also a manual called [GS]
Getting started, which covers some of the features briefly described in this introduction in more detail.
Sometimes you might need help regarding a particular Stata function or command. For every com-
mand, Statas in-built support can be called by typing ‘help’ followed by the command in question in
the Command window or via the Help menu icon. The information you will receive is an abbreviated
version of the Stata pdf manual entry.
3
For a very good overview of Stata’s help features and useful resources, refer to the manual entries ‘4 Getting help’ in
the [GS] manual and ‘3 Resources for learning and using Stata’ in the [U] manual.
3
For a more comprehensive search or if you do not know what command to use, type in ‘search’
or ‘findit’ followed by specific keywords. Stata then also provides links to external (web) sources or
user-written commands regarding your particular enquiry.
Besides the help features that come with the Stata package, there is a variety of external resources.
For instance, the online Stata Forum is a great source if you have questions regarding specific function-
alities or do not know how to implement particular statistical tests in Stata. Browsing of questions and
answers by the Stata community is available without registration; if you would like to post questions and
or provide answers to a posted question you need to register to the forum first (http://www.statalist.
org/). Another great resource is the Stata homepage. There you can find several video tutorials on a
variety of topics (http://www.stata.com/links/video-tutorials/). Several academics also publish
their Stata code on their institution’s website and several U.S. institutions provide Stata tutorials that
can be accessed via their homepages (e.g., http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/).
4
2 Data Management
2.1 Variables and Data Types
It is useful to learn a bit about the different data types and variable types used in Stata as several Stata
commands distinguish between the type of data that you are dealing with and several commands require
the data to be stored as a certain data type.
Numeric or String Data

We can broadly distinguish between two data types: numeric and string. Numeric is for storing numbers;
string resembles a text variable. Variables stored as numeric data can be used for computation and in
estimations. Stata has different numeric formats or storage types which vary according to the number
of integers they can capture. The more integers a format type can capture the greater its precision, but
also the greater the storage space needed. Stata’s default numeric option is float which stores data as a
real number with up to 8 digits. This is sufficiently accurate for most work. Stata also has the following
numeric storage types available: byte (integer, e.g., for dummy variables), int (integer, e.g., for year
variables), long (integer, e.g., for population data), and double (real number with 16 digits of accuracy).
Any variable can be designated as a string variable, even numbers. However, in the latter case Stata
would not recognise the data as numbers anymore but would treat them as any other text input. No
computation or estimations can be performed on string variables. String variables can contain up to 244
characters. String values have to be put in quotation marks when being referred to in Stata commands.
To preserve space, only store variables with the minimum storage requirements.4
Continuous, Categorical, and Indicator Variables

Stata has very convenient functions that facilitate the work and estimation with categorical and indicator
variables but also other convenient data manipulations such as lags and leads of variables.5
Missing Values
Stata marks missing values in series by a dot. Missing numeric observations are denoted by a single
dot (.), while missing string observations are referred to either by blank double quotes (“ ”) or dot
double quotes (“.”). Stata can define multiple different missing values, such as .a, .b, .c, etc. This
is useful to distinguish between the reasons why a data point is missing, such as the data point was
missing in the original dataset or the data point has been manually removed from the dataset. The
largest 27 numbers of each numeric format are preserved for missing values. This is important to keep in
mind when applying constraints in Stata. For example, typing the command ‘describe age if age>= 27’
includes observations for which the person’s age is missing, while the command ‘describe age if age>=27
& age!=.’ excludes observations with missing age data.
2.2 Formats and Variable Labels

Each variable may have its own display format. This does not alter the content or precision of the
variable but only affects how it is displayed. You can change the format of a variable by clicking on
4
A very helpful command to check whether data can be stored in a data type that requires less storage space is by
using the ‘compress’ command.
5
More on this topic can be found in Stata Manual [U] User’s Guide, 25 Working with categorical data and factor
variables.
5
Data/Variable Manager, by directly changing the format in the Variable Manager window at the
bottom right of the Stata main screen or by using the command ‘format’ followed by the new format
specification and the name of the variable. There are different format types that correspond to ordinary
numeric values as well as specific formats for dates and time.
We can attach labels to variables, an entire dataset or to specific values of the variable (e.g., in the
case of categorical or indicator variables). Labelling a variable might be helpful to document the content
of a certain variable or how it has been constructed. You can attach a label to a variable by clicking in
the label dialogue box in the Variable Manager window or by clicking on Data/Variable Manager.
A value label can also be attached to a variable using the Variable Manager window.6
2.3 Data Input and Saving

One of the first steps of every statistical analysis is importing the dataset to be analysed into the software
package. Depending on the format of the data there are different ways of accomplishing this task. If the
dataset is already in a Stata format which is indicated by the file suffix ‘.dta’, click on File/Open. . .
and simply select the dataset to work with. Alternatively, use the ‘use’ command followed by the name
and location of the dataset, e.g., ‘use ”G:\Stata training\sp500.dta”, clear’. The term ‘clear’ tells Stata
to close all workfiles that are currently in memory.
If your dataset is in Excel format you click on File/Import/Excel spreadsheet (*.xls;*.xlsl) and
select the Excel file to import into Stata. A new window appears which provides a preview of the data
and in which you can specify certain options as to how you would like the dataset to be imported. If
you prefer to use a command to import the data, type the command ‘import excel’ into the command
window followed by the file name and location as well as potential importing options.
Stata can also import text data, data in SAS format, and other formats (see File/Import) or you
can directly paste observations into the Data Editor. You save changes to the data using the command
save or by selecting the File/Save as. . . option in the menu. Stata 15 also provides an add-in to
import data directly from the FRED data base.7
When you read data into Stata, it stores it in the RAM (memory). All changes you make are
temporary and will be lost if you close the file without saving it. It is also important to keep in mind
that Stata has no Undo options so that some changes cannot be undone (e.g., dropping of variables).
You can generate a snapshot of the data in your Data Editor or by the command ‘snapshot save’ to
be able to reset data to a previous stage.
6
We will not focus on value labels in this guide. The interested reader is advised to refer to the corresponding entries
in the Stata manual to learn more about value labels.
7
This data are publicly available on the website of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (https://fred.stlouisfed.
org/). We will use it in section 9.
6
Figure 2: Importing Excel Data into Stata
Now let us import a dataset to see how the single steps would be performed. The dataset to import
into Stata is the excel file UKHP.xls. First, select File/Import/Excel spreadsheet (*.xls;*.xlsx)
and click on the button Browse. . . . Now choose the ‘UKHP.xls’ file, click Open and you should find
a preview of the data at the bottom of the dialogue window, as shown in Figure 2, left panel. We could
further specify the worksheet of the Excel file we would like to import by clicking on the drop-down
menu next to the box Worksheet; however, since the ‘UKHP.xls’ file only has one worksheet we leave
this box as it is.
The box headed Edit cell range allows the user to specify the cells to import from a specific
worksheet. By clicking on the button with the three dots we can define the cell range. In our case we
want the Upper-left cell to be A1 and the lower-right cell to be B328 (see Figure 2, right panel). Finally,
there are two boxes that can be checked: Import first row as variable names tells Stata that the
first rows are not to be interpreted as data points but as the names of the variables. Since this is the
case for ‘UKHP.xls’ we check this box. The second option, Import all data as strings tells Stata
to store all series as string variables, independent of whether the original series might contain numbers.
We want Stata to import our data as numeric values and thus we leave this box unchecked. Once you
have undertaken all these specifications, the dialogue window should resemble Figure 2, left panel. The
last thing we need to do to import the data into Stata is to press OK. If the task has been successful
we should find the command line import excel followed by the file location and further specifications
in the Output window as well as the Review window. Additionally, there should now be two variables
in the Variables window: Month and AverageHousePrice. Note that Stata automatically attached
a variable label to the two series in the workfile which are identical to the variable names.
You can save the imported dataset as a Stata workfile by clicking on File/Save as. . . and specifying
the name of the dataset – in our case ‘ukhp.dta’. Note that we recognise that the dataset is now stored
as a Stata workfile by the file-suffix ‘.dta’.
2.4 Data Description

Once you have imported the data, you want to get an idea of what the data are like and you want to
check that all the values have been correctly imported and that all variables are stored in the correct
format.
7
There are several Stata functions to examine and describe your data. It is often useful to visually
inspect the data first. This can be done in the Data Editor mode. You can access the Data Editor
by clicking on the respective icons in the Stata icon menu as described above. Alternatively, you can
directly use the commands browse or edit.
Additionally, you can let Stata describe the data for you. If you click on Data/Describe data you
will find a variety of options to get information about the content and structure of the dataset.
In order to describe the data structure of the ‘UKHP.dta’ file you can use the describe command
which you can find in the Stata menu under Describe data in memory or in a file. It provides the
number of observations and variables, the size of the dataset as well as variable specifics such as storage
type and display format. If we do this for our example session, we are presented the following output
in the Output window.8
We see that our dataset contains two variables, one that is stored as ‘int’ and one as ‘double’. We
can also see the the display format and that the two variables have a variable label but no value label
attached.
Figure 3: Generating Summary Statistics

8
To separate output from text, we will always mark Stata output with a thick horizontal line above and below.
8
The command summarize provides summary statistics of the variables. You can find it under Data/De-
scribe data/Summary statistics. If we click on this option, a new dialogue window appears where
we can specify what variables we would like to generate summary statistics for (Figure 3).
If you do not specify any variables, Stata assumes you would like summary statistics for all variables in
memory. Again, it provides a variety of options to customise the summary statistics. Besides Standard
display, we can tell Stata to Display additional statistics, or (rather as a program command for
subsequent use) to merely calculate the mean without showing any output.9 Using the tab by/if/in
allows us to restrict the data to a subsample. The tab Weights provides options to weight the data
points in your sample. However, we want to create simple summary statistics for the two variables in
our dataset so we keep all the default specifications and simply press OK. Then the following output
should appear in our Output window.
Note that the summary statistics for ‘Month’ are not intuitive to read as Stata provides summary
statistics in the coded format and does not display the variable in the (human readable) date format.
Another useful command is ‘codebook’, which can be accessed via Data/Describe data/De-
scribe data contents (codebook). It provides additional information on the variables, such as sum-
mary statistics on numeric variables, examples of data points for string variables, the number of missing
observations, and some information about the distribution of the series. The ‘codebook’ command is
especially useful if the dataset is unknown and you would like to get a first overview of the characteristics
of the data. In order to open the command dialogue window we follow the path mentioned above.
Similar to the ‘summarize’ command, we can execute the task for all variables by leaving the Variables
box blank. Again, we can select further options using the other tabs. If we simply press OK without
making further specifications, we generate the output on the next page.
We can see from the output below that the variable Month is stored as a daily variable with days
as units. However, the units of observations are actually months so that we will have to adjust the type
of the variable to a monthly time variable (which we will do in the next section).
There is a variety of other tools that can be used to describe the data and you can customise them
to your specific needs. For instance, with the ‘by’ prefix in front of a summary command you can create
summary statistics by subgroups. You can also explicitly specify the statistics that should be reported
in the table of summary statistics using the command tabstat. To generate frequency tables of specific
variables, the command tabulate can be used. Another great feature of Stata is that many of these
commands are also available as panel data versions.
9
An application where the latter option will prove useful is presented in later sections of this guide that introduce
programming in Stata.
9
2.5 Changing Data
Often you need to change your data by creating new variables, changing the content of existing data
series or by adjusting the display format of the data. In the following, we will focus on some of the most
important Stata features to manipulate and format the data, though this list is not exhaustive. There
are several ways you can change data in your dataset.
One of the simplest is to rename the variables. For instance, the variable name ‘AverageHouse-
Price’ is very long and it might be very inconvenient to type such a long name every time you need
to refer to it in a Stata task. Thus, we want to change the name of the variable to ‘hp’. To do so, we
click on Data/Data utilities and then select Rename groups of variables. A new dialogue window
appears where we can specify exactly how we would like to rename our variable (Figure 4).
10
Figure 4: Renaming Variables
As you can see from the list of different renaming options, the dialogue box offers a variety of ways to
facilitate renaming a variable, such as changing the case on a variable (from lower-case to upper-case,
and vice versa) or by adding a prefix or suffix to a variable. However, we want to simply change the
name of the variable to a predefined name so we keep the default option Rename list of variables.
Next, choose the variable we want to rename from the drop-down menu next to the Existing variable
names box, i.e., AverageHousePrice. Now we simply need to type in the new name in the dialogue
box New variable names which is hp.10 By clicking OK, Stata performs the command. If we now
look at the Variables window we should find that the data series bears the new name. Additionally,
we see that Stata shows the command line that corresponds to the ‘rename’ specification we have just
performed in the Output window and the Review window:
rename (AverageHousePrice) (hp)
Thus, we could have achieved the same result by typing the above command line into the Command
window and pressing Enter. Stata also allows you to drop specific variables or observations from the
dataset, or, alternatively, to specify the variables and/or observations that should be kept in the dataset,
using the drop or keep commands, respectively. In the Stata menu, these commands can be accessed via
Data/Create or change data/Drop or keep observations. To drop or keep variables, you can also
simply right-click on a variable in the Variables window and select Drop selected variables or Keep
only selected variables, respectively. As we do not want to remove any variables or observations from
our ‘ukhp.dta’ dataset, we leave this exercise for future examples.
If you intend to change the content of variables you use the command replace. We can access this
command by clicking Data/Create or change data/Change contents of variable. It follows a
very similar logic to the command that generates a new variable. As we will explain in detail how to
generate new variables in the next section and as we will be using the ‘replace’ command in later sections
we will not go into further detail regarding this command.
Other useful commands to change variables are destring and encode. We only provide a brief
description of the functionalities of each command. The interested reader is advised to learn more
10
Note that using this dialogue window you can rename a group of variables at the same time by selecting all variables
you would like to rename in the ‘Existing variable names’ box and listing the new names for the variables in the matching
order in the ‘New variable names’ box.
11
about these commands from the Stata pdf manuals. Sometimes Stata does not recognise numeric
variables as numeric and stores them as string instead. destring converts these string data into numeric
variables, while encode is another command to convert string into numeric variables. However, unlike
‘destring’, the series that is to be converted into numeric equivalents does not need to be numeric in
nature, ‘encode’ rather provides a numeric equivalent to a (non-numeric) value, i.e., a coded value.
2.6 Generating New Variables

One of the most commonly used commands is generate. It creates a new variable having a particular
value or according to a specific expression. When using the Stata menu we can access it following the
path Data/Create or change data/Create new variable.
Suppose, for example, we have a time-series called Z, the latter can be modified in the different ways
so as to create variables (see Table 1, left). Sometimes you might like to construct a variable containing
the mean, the absolute, or the standard deviation of another variable or value. To do so, you will need
to use the extended version of the ‘generate’ command, the egen function.
Additionally, when creating new variables you might need to employ some logical operators, for
example when adding conditions. The right side of Table 1 shows the most commonly used logical
operators in Stata.
Table 1: Commonly Used Operators
Z/2 Dividing == (exactly) equal to

Z*2 Multiplication != not equal to
Zˆ2 Squaring > larger than
log(Z) Taking the logarithms < smaller than
exp(Z) Taking the exponential >= larger than or equal to
L.Z Lagging the data <= smaller than or equal to
log(Z/L.Z) Creating the log returns & AND
| OR
! NOT
Let us have a look how to practically generate a new variable. For example, as mentioned earlier,
the variable Month is stored as a daily variable; however, we would like to have a time variable that is
stored as a monthly series. Thus, we can use Stata’s ‘generate’ function to create a new monthly time
variable. Using the Stata menu to access the ‘generate’ command, a dialogue box appears where we can
specify the contents of the new variable (Figure 5, left panel).
The first thing to be specified is the Variable type. The default is float and for the time being we
will keep the default. Next, we define the name of the new variable. In our case, we could simply use
the lower-case version of month to indicate the monthly series, i.e., Variable name: month.
12
Figure 5: Generating a Monthly Date Series
Next we need to define the Contents of variable by selecting the option Specify a value or an
expression. As stated in the header, the variable content can either be a value, e.g., ‘2’, or it can be
an expression. In our case, we need to specify an expression. If we know the function to convert daily
to monthly data by heart we can simply type it into the respective box. Otherwise, we could use the
‘Expression Builder’ by clicking on Create. . . next to the box. The ‘Expression Builder’ opens and
under Category we select Functions/Date and time (Figure 5, right panel). We now see all date,
and time-related functions on the left of the window. We look for mofd – i.e., month of day – and
double click on it. It is then sent to the dialogue box at the top of the ‘Expression Builder’ window.
Type ‘Month’ in between the brackets and press OK. The ‘generate’ dialogue window should now look
like the left panel of Figure 5. We click OK again and we should now find a new variable in the Variable
window called ‘month’.
Figure 6: The Variables Manager Window
It is useful to perform the codebook command on this variable to see whether we need to make further
adjustments. We can either use the Stata menu to access the ‘codebook’ dialog window (as described
above) or we could simply type codebook month into the Command window and press Enter. We
see that the format type of the variable of ‘month’ is not one of the date-related formats. So in order to
13
make the variable more easily readable we can change its format type. To do so we open the Variables
Manger by clicking on Data/Variables Manager (Figure 6).
Figure 7: Changing the Format Type for a Monthly Date Variable
Select the variable month from the list and in the Variable properties column on the left we search
for the box Format and click on the button Create. . . next to it. A new dialogue window appears
which asks to select the appropriate format (Figure 7). Search for Monthly under the Type of data
heading. We then see several samples of monthly formats and we now simply need to select our preferred
format type. In this case, stick with the default, which is the first option in the list. Press OK to return
to the Variables Manager and then select Apply at the bottom-left of the window so that the changes
become effective. After having done so we can simply close the window.
Figure 8: Declaring Your Dataset to be Time-Series Data
If you re-run the ‘codebook’ command on ‘month’ you can see that the format type has success-
fully been changed to a monthly format. Finally, tell Stata that the data are in time-series form (as
compared to cross-sectional or panel data). This is necessary to use certain time-series commands or
to use leads and lags of variables. You can do this by selecting Statistics/Time series/Setup and
utilities/Declare data to be time-series data. In the dialog window that appears choose Time
14
variable: month and further select Monthly from the Time unit and display format options
(Figure 8). Leave everything else blank and press OK. If we have successfully set up our time-series
data, we should read the following lines in the Output window:
Moreover, it is of interest to generate a further variable containing simple percentage changes in house
prices. Again, open the ‘generate’ dialog window (Figure 9). Define the new series to have the Variable
name: dhp, while keeping the float variable type. With respect to the contents of the new variable,
type the following expression:
100*(hp-L.hp)/L.hp
Note that the term L.hp indicates a one-period lag of the ‘hp’ series. We then simply press OK and
the new variable ‘dhp’ should appear in the Variable window.
Figure 9: Generating Simple Percentage Changes in House Prices
2.7 Plots
Stata supports a wide range of graph types that can be found under the Graphics icon in the menu,
including line graphs, bar graphs, pie charts, mixed-line graphs, scatterplots and a number of dataset-
specific graphs such as time-series-specific or panel-specific plots. There is a variety of options to select
the line types, colour, border characteristics, headings, shading, and scalding, including dual scale
graphs. Legends are automatically created (although they can be removed if desired), and customised
graphs can be incorporated into other Windows applications using copy-and-paste, or by exporting as
another file format, including Windows metafiles, portable networks graphics, or pdf. For the latter you
simply click on File/Save as. . . in the ‘Graph’ window and select the desired file format.
Assume that we would like to construct a line plot of the ‘hp’ series. To do so, we select Graphics/Time-
series graphs/Line plots (Figure 10, left panel). In the dialogue window that appears we click on
Create. . . and a new window pops up, entitled ‘Plot 1’ (Figure 10, right panel).
15
Figure 10: Creating a Line Plot of the Average House Price Series
In this window, we can first Choose a plot category and type. As we want to create a line plot
we keep the default option Time-series plot. Next we Select type of the graph. From a number of
different graph types, including ‘Line’, ‘Scatter’, ‘Connected’, ‘Bar’, etc., we choose Line. Now we just
specify which variable we want to plot. As we want to plot the average house price series we select Y
variable: hp from the drop-down menu. Note that by clicking on the button Line properties we
could adjust the line type and colour. However, for the time being we keep the default options and
simply select Accept in order to return to the main dialogue window. We could now add more series to
our graphs by clicking on Create. . . again. We can also Edit ‘Plot 1’ by clicking the respective button.
Additionally, there are a number of other options available using the further tabs, e.g., restricting the
sample being plotted or formatting the Y and X axes, the titles and the legend. By clicking OK, the
specified graph appears in a new window (Figure 11).
Figure 11: Line Plot of the Average House Price Series
The ‘Graph’ window also has a menu and toolbar which enables you to save and copy the graph or to
customise it further. For instance, by clicking on the icon resembling a bar chart with a pen you open
the Graph Editor which allows you to adjust the scaling, the style of the axes and many more.
16
Another commonly used plot is the histogram that gives us a graphical illustration of the distribution
of a series. It is basically a bar chart that demonstrates the proportion of the series that falls in a specific
range of values. To show how to create a histogram using Stata we will employ the ‘dhp’ series. Again
we select the Graphics section in the Stata menu and click on Histogram to open a new dialogue
window (Figure 12, upper panel).
Figure 12: Creating a Histogram
First, we need to specify Variable: dhp from the drop-down menu. Stata also asks us whether the
data are continuous or discrete. As the ‘dhp’ series is a continuous variable we can keep the default
option. The next boxes allow us to further customise the graph. The Bins box, for instance, enables
us to choose the number of bins or the bin width. Using the Y axis box we can also select whether the
histogram is expressed in terms of the density, the faction, frequency, or percentage of the distribution.
Additionally, a series of other adjustment options is available when using the further tabs. Simply click
OK and the histogram of the ‘dhp’ series should resemble Figure 12, lower panel.
17
2.8 Keeping Track of Your Work
In order to be able to reproduce your work and remember what you have done after some time, you
can record both the results and the list of commands. To record the outputs that appear in the Results
window, use Log files. Open a new log file by clicking on the respective icon in the Stata toolbar.
Log files can be printed or saved in other file formats. When returning to a Stata session, you can also
append a log file saved during a previous session.
Do-files can be used to record the set of commands that you have used during a session. Put simply,
a do-file is a single file that lists a whole set of commands. This enables you to execute all commands
in one go or only a selection of the commands. By saving the do-files you are able to easily replicate
analyses done in previous Stata sessions. Do-files can be written in any text editor, such as Word or
Notepad. It is good practice to keep extensive notes within your do-file so that when you look back over
it you know what you were trying to achieve with each command or set of commands. We will be using
do-files in later sections of this guide so will leave a more detailed description of do-files and the ‘Do-file
Editor’ until then.
2.9 Saving Data and Results

Data generated in Stata can be exported to other Windows applications, e.g., Microsoft Excel, or to
a data format used by other statistical software packages. To export data, click on File/Export and
then choose the file type required. In the ‘export’ dialogue window you can then specify the variables
to export or you can restrict the sample to export. You also need to specify a file name and location for
the new file.
You can export single outputs by highlighting them in the Results window, then right-clicking on
the highlighted section and choosing the ‘Copy’ option required. For example, you can copy as a table
(and paste the results into Excel) or you can copy as a picture.
Additionally, there are several other commands that can be used to save estimation results or to
generate formatted tables of results. Some useful commands are, for example, ‘estimates save’ or the
user-written command ‘outreg2’.11
11
The latter is a user-written ado-file that needs to be installed before you can use it. This can be easily done by typing
‘findit outreg2’ into your command window and clicking on the link for outreg2. Once you have installed it, you can use
it as if it was a built-in Stata function. It also has its own help description that you can access via the command ‘help
outreg2’.
18
3 Linear Regression – Estimation of an Optimal Hedge Ratio
Reading: Brooks (2019, Section 3.3)
This section shows how to run a bivariate regression using Stata. In our example an investor wishes
to hedge a long position in the S&P500 (or its constituent stocks) using a short position in futures
contracts. The investor is interested in the optimal hedge ratio, i.e., the number of units of the futures
asset to sell per unit of the spot assets held.12
Figure 13: Importing Time-Series Data into Stata
This regression will be run using the file ‘SandPhedge.xls’, which contains monthly returns for the
S&P500 Index (in Column 2) and the S&P500 Futures (in Column 3). Before we run the regression,
we need to import this Excel workfile into Stata. For this, we click on File in the top left corner of the
Stata main screen and select Import and Excel spreadsheet (*.xls; *.xlsx). The Import Excel
window appears (Figure 13). We click on Browse. . . and select the file ‘SandPhedge.xls’. As the first
row of the data contains the variable names, check the box Import first row as variable names.
Stata provides a preview of the data contained in the file at the bottom of the window. Click OK in
order to import the data into Stata.
We can see the three imported data series in the Variables window on the right-hand side of the
screen. In order to examine the data and verify some data entries, you can click on the Data Editor
(Edit) symbol in the toolbar. Alternatively, type the command edit into the Command window at the
very bottom of the Stata screen.
Stata automatically identifies the series ‘date’ as a series containing dates. However, it codes the
variable as a daily series instead of a monthly one. In order to change this, we click on Data in the
top left corner and select Create or change data/Change contents of variable. A new dialogue
window appears (Figure 14, left panel).
12
See also Chapter 9 in Brooks (2019).
19
Figure 14: Changing the Unit of Date Variables
First, we select the variable to change, i.e., Date, in the dialog box Variable. Next, we click on the
button Create. . . and a new window appears (Figure 14, right panel). In the Expression builder
window we click on the ‘plus’ sign next to the option Functions. Since the variable is a time variable
we select Date and time and scroll down the options on the right until we find the function mofd().13
We double-click on mofd() and the expression appears in the dialog box in the top of the window. We
type Date in between the parentheses and click on OK. The expression now appears in the dialog box
New contents: (value or expression).14 By clicking OK Stata will replace the daily variable ‘Date’
with its monthly equivalent.15
Figure 15: Variables Manager for S&P Dataset

13
mofd() is an abbreviation for month of date and returns the monthly date of a variable that contains daily dates.
14
Alternatively, if you know the function to use, you can directly input the expression in the dialogue box New contents:
(value or expression).
15
The command for this data manipulation appears in the Review window on the left. By clicking on it, it appears in
the Command window at the bottom of the Stata screen. As a (faster) alternative than using the ‘point-or-click’ menu
to execute the data manipulation, we could have directly typed the command in the Command window.
20
Figure 16: Variable Manager
In order to change the display format of the changed variable from a daily to a monthly format, we click
Data in the top left menu and select Variable Manager. In the newly appearing window we select the
variable Date and click the box Create. . . next to the Format dialog box on the left (Figure 15).
A new window appears (Figure 16). We specify the Type of data to be Monthly and click OK.16
To make these changes effective, we click on Apply at the bottom right of the window. Afterwards, we
just close the Variable Manager window. In order to see the effect of these changes, change to the Data
Editor by clicking on the respective symbol in toolbar or, alternatively, type in the command edit in
the Command window.
Figure 17: Declare Dataset to be Time-Series Data
As we want to perform time-series regressions, we need to tell Stata which of the three variables is the
time indicator. To do so, we click on Statistics in the top right menu and select Time Series/Setup
16
In the dialogue box Samples, we can choose between different ways of displaying the monthly data series. These
options merely represent different display formats and do not change the characteristics of the underlying series. The
choice of the display format depends on personal taste, so choose the format that is most appealing to you.
21
and Utilities/Declare dataset to be time-series data. In the dialogue box we select the time
variable Date and further specify that the Time unit and display format of the time variable is
Monthly (Figure 17). We can ignore the other options for now.
By clicking OK, the command together with the specifications of the time variable ‘Date’ appear
in the Output window. ‘delta: 1 month’ indicates that the time variable is monthly data and that the
difference between a data entry and the consecutive data entry is 1 month.17
We run our analysis based on returns of the S&P500 index instead of price levels; so the next step
is to transform the ‘spot’ and ‘future’ price series into percentage returns. For our analysis we use
continuously compounded returns, i.e., logarithmic returns, instead of simple returns as it is common in
academic finance research. To generate a new data series of continuously compounded returns, we click
on Data and select Create or change data/Create new variable. A new window appears where
we can specify the new variable we want to create (Figure 18).
Figure 18: Computing Continuously Compounded Returns
We keep the default Variable type specification of float which specifies that the newly created variable
is a data series of real numbers with about 8 digits.18 We name the new variable rfutures in the
Variable name dialogue box. Next, we enter 100*(ln(Futures)-ln(L.Futures)) into the dialog box
that asks us to Specify a value or an expression. ‘ln()’ generates the natural logarithm of the data
series and ‘L.’ represents a time operator indicating a 1-period lagged value of the variable ‘future’.19
To generate the new variable, we click on OK.
Next, we generate continuously compounded returns for the ‘spot’ price series. We can either use the
Stata ‘point-or-click’ menu and repeat the steps described above with the ‘spot’ series; or, as a faster
alternative, we can directly type in the command in the Command window. In the latter case, we type
generate rspot = 100*(ln(Spot)-ln(L.Spot))

17
Note that if we had not changed ‘Date’ from a daily data series into a monthly data series the data unit would be
indicated as ‘1 day’. This might lead to problems in case we want to execute time operators in further analyses.
18
An accuracy of eight digits is sufficiently accurate for most work. However, if you need a higher accuracy of the data,
e.g., as you are working with very small decimal number, you can change the variable type to double which creates a
variable with an accuracy of 16 digits.
19
In order to use the time operators, the time-series operator needs to be set using the tsset command described above.
Time-series operators are a very useful Stata tool. For more information on time-series operators type in help tsvarlist
in the Command box and corresponding chapter in the Data documentation.
22
and press Enter to execute the command. Do not forget to save the workfile selecting File and Save
as. . . . Call the workfile ‘hedge.dta’. Continue to re-save the file at regular intervals to ensure that no
work is lost.
Before proceeding to estimate the regression, now that we have imported more than one series,
we can examine a number of descriptive statistics together and measures of association between the
series. For the summary statistics, we click on Data and Describe data/Summary statistics. In
the dialogue box that appears, we type (or select from the drop-down menu) rspot rfutures and click
OK (Figure 19).
Figure 19: Generating Summary Statistics
The following summary statistics appear in the Output window:
We observe that the two return series are quite similar as based on their mean values, standard deviations,
as well as minimum and maximum values, as one would expect from economic theory.20 Note that the
number of observations has reduced from 247 for the levels of the series to 246 when we computed the
returns (as one observation is ‘lost’ in constructing the t − 1 value of the prices in the returns formula).
If you want to save the summary statistics, you must either highlight the table, left-click, (Copy table)
and paste it into an Excel spreadsheet; or you open a log file before undertaking the analysis which
will record all command outputs displayed in the Output window. To start a log, we click on the Log
20
Stata allows you to customise your summary statistics by choosing the type of statistics and their order. For this
you can use the tabstat command. Click on Statistics and Summaries, tables, and tests. Select Other tables and
Compact table of summary statistics. Specify the variables in the ‘Variables’ dialogue box. Next select and specify
the number and type of Statistics to display by checking the box next to the statistic and selecting the statistic of
choice from the drop-down menu. Once you have finalised your selection, click on OK and the summary statistics will
appear in the Output window.
23
symbol (which resembles a notepad) in the menu and save it. Remember to close the log file when you
have finished the analyses by clicking on the Log symbol again and selecting Close log file.
We can now proceed to estimate the regression. We click on Statistics and choose the second
option in the list, Linear models and related and Linear regression. In the dialogue window
entitled ‘regress - Linear regression’, we first specify the dependent variable (y), rspot (Figure 20).
Figure 20: Estimating OLS Regressions
The independent variable is the rfutures series. Thus, we are trying to explain variations in the spot
rates with variations in the futures rates. Stata automatically includes a constant term in the linear
regression; therefore you do not specifically include it among the independent variables. If you do not
wish to include a constant term in the regression you need to check the box Suppress constant term.
The regress command estimates an OLS regression based on the whole sample. You can customise the
regression specification, e.g., with respect to the selected sample or the treatment of standard errors, by
using the other tabs. However, for now we stick with the default specification and press OK in order
to run the regression. The regression results will appear in the Output window as follows:
The parameter estimates for the intercept (α̂) and slope (β̂) are 0.013 and 0.975, respectively.21 A large
21
Note that in order to save the regression output you have to Copy table as described above for the summary statistics
24
number of other statistics are also presented in the regression output – the purpose and interpretation
of these will be discussed later.
Now we estimate a regression for the levels of the series rather than the returns (i.e., we run a regres-
sion of ‘spot’ on a constant and ‘future’) and examine the parameter estimates. We can either follow
the steps described above and specify ‘spot’ as the dependent variable and ‘future’ as the independent
variable; or we can directly type the command into the Command window as
regress Spot Futures
and press Enter to run the regression (see below). The intercept estimate (α̂) in this regression is –2.838
and the slope estimate (β̂) is 1.002.
Let us now turn to the (economic) interpretation of the parameter estimates from both regressions. The
estimated return regression slope parameter measures the optimal hedge ratio as well as the short run
relationship between the two series. By contrast, the slope parameter in a regression using the raw spot
and futures indices (or the log of the spot series and the log of the futures series) can be interpreted as
measuring the long run relationship between them. The intercept of the price level regression can be
considered to approximate the cost of carry. Looking at the actual results, we find that the long-term
relationship between spot and futures prices is almost 1:1 (as expected). Before exiting Stata, do not
forget to click the Save button to save the whole workfile.
or remember to start a log file before undertaking the analysis. There are also other ways to export regression results.
For more details on saving results, refer to Section 2.9 of this guide.
25
4 Hypothesis Testing – Example 1: Hedging Revisited
Reading: Brooks (2019, Sections 3.8 and 3.9)
Let us now have a closer look at the results table from the returns regressions in the previous section
where we regressed S&P500 spot returns on futures returns in order to estimate the optimal hedge ratio
for a long position in the S&P500. If you do not have the results ready on your Stata main screen,
reload the ‘SandPhedge.dta’ file now and re-estimate the returns regression using the steps described
in the previous section (or, alternatively, type in regress rspot rfutures into the Command window
and execute the command). While we have so far mainly focused on the coefficient estimates, i.e., α and
β estimates, Stata has also calculated several other statistics which are presented next to the coefficient
estimates: standard errors, the t-ratios, and the p-values.
The t-ratios are presented in the third column indicated by the ‘t’ in the column heading. They are
the test statistics for a test of the null hypothesis that the true values of the parameter estimates are
zero against a two-sided alternative, i.e., they are either larger or smaller than zero. In mathematical
terms, we can express this test with respect to our coefficient estimates as testing H0 : α = 0 versus
H1 : α 6= 0 for the constant ‘ cons’ in the second row of numbers and H0 : β = 0 versus H1 : β 6= 0
for ‘rfutures’ in the first row. Let us focus on the t-ratio for the α estimate first. We see that with
a value of only 0.44 the t-ratio is very small which indicates that the corresponding null hypothesis
H0 : α = 0 is likely not to be rejected. Turning to the slope estimate for ‘rfutures’, the t-ratio is high
with 146.54 suggesting that H0 : β = 0 is to be rejected against the alternative hypothesis of H1 : β 6= 0.
The p-values presented in the fourth column, ‘P > |t|’, confirm our expectations: the p-value for the
constant is considerably larger than 0.1 meaning that the corresponding t-statistic is not even significant
at a 10% level; in comparison, the p-value for the slope coefficient is zero to, at least, three decimal
points. Thus, the null hypothesis for the slope coefficient is rejected at the 1% level.
Figure 21: Postestimation Selector
While Stata automatically computes and reports the test statistics for the null hypothesis that the
coefficient estimates are zero, we can also test other hypotheses about the values of these coefficient
estimates. Suppose that we want to test the null hypothesis that H0 : β = 1. We can, of course,
26
calculate the test statistics for this hypothesis test by hand; however, it is easier if we let Stata do this
work. For this we use the Stata command ‘test’. ‘test’ performs Wald tests of simple and composite
linear hypotheses about the parameters of the most recently fit model.22 To access the Wald test, we
click on Statistics and select Postestimation (second option from the bottom). The new window
entitled ‘Postestimation Selector’ appears (Figure 21). We select Tests, contrasts, and comparisons
of parameter estimates and then chose the option Linear tests of parameter estimates.
The ‘test’ specification window should appear (Figure 22, left panel). We click on Create. . . next
to Specification 1 and a new window, entitled ‘Specification 1’ appears (Figure 22, right panel). In the
box Test type we choose the second option Linear expressions are equal and we select Coefficient:
rfutures. This is because we want to test a linear hypothesis that the coefficient estimate for ‘rfutures’
is equal to 1. Note that the first specification Coefficients are 0 is equal to the test statistics for the
null hypothesis H0 : β = 0 versus H1 : β 6= 0 for the case of ‘rfutures’ that we discussed above and that
is automatically reported in the regression output.23 Next, we specify the linear expression we would
like to test in the dialog box Linear expression. In our case we type in rfutures=1.
Figure 22: Specifying the Wald Linear Hypothesis Test
To generate the test statistic, we press OK and again OK. The Stata output should appear in the
Output window as follows.
The first line ‘test (rfutures=1)’ repeats our test command and the second line‘( 1) rfutures = 1’
reformulates it. Below we find the test statistics: ‘F(1,244) = 14.03’ states the value of the F -test with
22
Thus, if you want to do a t-test based on the coefficient estimates of the return regression make sure that the return
regression is the last regression you estimated (and not the regression on price levels).
23
For more information on the ‘test’ command and the specific tests it can perform refer to the Stata Manual entry test
or type in help test in the Command window.
27
one restriction and (T − k) = 246 − 2 = 244 which is 14.03. The corresponding p-value is 0.0002, stated
in the last output line. As it is considerably smaller than 0.05 we can reject the null hypothesis that the
coefficient estimate is equal to 1 at the 5% level. Note that Stata only presents one test statistic, the
F -test statistic, and not as we might have expected the t-statistic. This is because the t-test is a special
version of the F -test for single restrictions, i.e., one numerator degree of freedom. Thus, they will give
the same conclusion and for brevity Stata only reports the F -test results.24
We can also perform hypothesis testing on the levels regressions. For this we re-estimate the regres-
sion in levels by typing regress spot future into the Command window and press Enter. Alternatively,
we use the menu to access the ‘regress’ dialogue box, as described in the previous section. Again, we
want to test the null hypothesis that H0 : β = 1 on the coefficient estimate for ‘Futures’, so we can
just type the command test (future=1) in the Command window and press Enter to generate the
corresponding F -statistics for this test. Alternatively, you can follow the steps described above using
the menu and the dialogue boxes. Both ways should generate the Stata output presented below.
With an F -statistic of 2.58 and a corresponding p-value of 0.1092, we find that the null hypothesis is
not rejected at the 5% significance level.
24
For details on the relationship between the t- and the F -distribution, refer to Chapter 4 in Brooks (2019).
28
5 Hypothesis Testing – Example 2: The CAPM
This exercise will estimate and test some hypotheses about the CAPM beta for several US stocks. The
data for this example are contained in the excel file ‘capm.xls’. We first import this data file into Stata
by selecting File/Import/Excel spreadsheet (*.xls; *.xlsx). As in the previous example, we first
need to format the ‘Date’ variable. To do so, type the following sequence of commands in the Command
window : first, change the Date type from daily to monthly with replace Date=mofd(Date); then
format the Date variable into human-readable format with format Date %tm; finally, define the time
variable using tsset Date.25 The imported data file contains monthly stock prices for the S&P500 index
(‘SANDP’), the four companies Ford (‘FORD’), General Electric (‘GE’), Microsoft (‘MICROSOFT’) and
Oracle (‘ORACLE’), as well as the 3-month US-Treasury bills (‘USTB3M’) from January 2002 until
February 2018. You can check that Stata has imported the data correctly by checking the variables in
the Variables window on the right of the Stata main screen and by typing in the command codebook
which will provide information on the data content of the variables in your workfile.26 Before proceeding
to the estimation, save the Stata workfile as ‘capm.dta’ selecting File/Save as. . . .
It is standard in the academic literature to use five years of monthly data for estimating betas, but
we will use all of the observations (over fifteen years) for now. In order to estimate a CAPM equation for
the Ford stock, for example, we need to first transform the price series into (continuously compounded)
returns and then to transform the returns into excess returns over the risk free rate. To generate
continuously compounded returns for the S&P500 index, click Data/Create or change data/Create
new variable. Specify the variable name to be rsandp and in the dialogue box Specify a value or an
expression type in 100*(ln(SANDP/L.SANDP)). Recall that the operator ‘L.’ is used to instruct
Stata to use one-period lagged observations of the series. Once completed, the input in the dialogue box
should resemble the input in Figure 23.
Figure 23: Generating Continuously Compounded Returns
By pressing OK, Stata creates a new data series named ‘rsandp’ that will contain continuously com-
25
Alternatively, you can execute these changes using the menu by following the steps outlined at the beginning of the
previous section.
26
Alternatively, click Data in the Stata menu and select Describe data/Describe data contents (codebook) to
access the command.
29
pounded returns of the S&P500. We need to repeat these steps for the stock prices of the four companies.
To accomplish this, we can either follow the same process as described for the S&P500 index or we can
directly type the commands in the Command window. For the latter, we type the command
generate rford=100*(ln(FORD/L.FORD))
into the Command window and press Enter. We should then find the new variable rford in the Variable
window on the right.27 Do the same for the remaining stock returns (except the 3-month Treasury bills,
of course), resulting in the series rford, rge and rmicrosoft.
In order to transform the returns into excess returns, we need to deduct the risk free rate, in our case
the 3-month US-Treasury bill rate, from the continuously compounded returns. However, we need to be
slightly careful because the stock returns are monthly, whereas the Treasury bill yields are annualised.
When estimating the model it is not important whether we use annualised or monthly rates; however,
it is crucial that all series in the model are measured consistently, i.e., either all of them are monthly
rates or all are annualised figures. We decide to transform the T-bill yields into monthly figures. To
do so we use the command replace USTB3M=USTB3M/12. We can directly input this command
in the Command window and press Enter to execute it; or we could use the Stata menu by selecting
Data/Create or change data/Change contents of variable and specify the new variable content
in the dialog box. Now that the risk free rate is a monthly rate, we can compute excess returns.
For example, to generate the excess returns for the S&P500 we type generate ersandp=rsandp-
USTB3M into the Command window and generate the new series by pressing Enter. We similarly
generate excess returns for the four stock returns.
Figure 24: Generating a Time-Series Plot of Two Series
Before running the CAPM regression, we plot the data series to examine whether they appear to move
together. We do this for the S&P500 and the Ford series. We click on Graphics in the Stata Menu
and choose Time-series graphs/Line plots and a dialogue box appears (Figure 24, left panel). Click
Create. . . and a new dialogue box appears (Figure 24, right panel). We first Choose a plot category
and type to be Time-series range plot. We keep the default type Range line and select ersandp
as Y1 variable and erford as Y2 variable. Then we close the dialogue box by clicking Accept. By
selecting OK in the ‘tsline’ dialogue box, Stata generates the time-series plot of the two data series
(Figure 25).28
27
If you have misspecified the command, Stata will not execute the command but will issue an error message that you
can read on the Output window. It usually provides further information as to the source of the error which should help
you to detect and correct the misspecification.
28
Note that the command for generating the plot appears in the Review window. In order to inspect the other data
series in the data file we can simply click on the tsrline command and substitute the data series of our choice.
30
Figure 25: Time-Series Plot of Two Series
However, in order to get an idea about the association between two series a scatter plot might be more
informative. To generate a scatter plot we first close the time-series plot and then we click on Graphics
and select Twoway graph (scatter, line, etc.). We select Create. . . . In the dialogue box that
appears, we specify the following graph characteristics: We keep the default options Basic plots and
Scatter and select erford as Y variable and ersandp as X variable (see the input in Figure 26, left
panel).
Figure 26: Generating a Scatter Plot of Two Series
We press Accept and OK and Stata generates a scatter plot of the excess S&P500 return and the
excess Ford return as depicted in Figure 26, right panel. We see from this scatter plot that there appears
to be a weak association between ‘ersandp’ and ‘erford’. We can also create similar scatter plots for the
other data series and the S&P500. Once finished, we just close the window of the graph.
To estimate the CAPM equation, we click on Statistics and then Linear models and related
and Linear regression so that the familiar dialogue window ‘regress - Linear regression’ appears.
31
Figure 27: Estimating the CAPM Regression Equation
For the case of the Ford stock, the CAPM regression equation takes the form
(RF ord − rf )t = α + β(RM − rf )t + ut (1)
Thus, the dependent variable (y) is the excess return of Ford ‘rspot’ and it is regressed on a constant as
well as the excess market return ‘ersandp’.29 Once you have specified the variables, the dialogue window
should resemble Figure 27. To estimate the equation press OK. The results appear in the Output
window as below.
Take a couple of minutes to examine the results of the regression. What is the slope coefficient estimate
and what does it signify? Is this coefficient statistically significant? The beta coefficient (the slope
coefficient) estimate is 1.89 with a t-ratio of 9.86 and a corresponding p-value of 0.000. This suggests
that the excess return on the market proxy has highly significant explanatory power for the variability
of the excess return of Ford stock.
Let us turn to the intercept now. What is the interpretation of the intercept estimate? Is it
statistically significant? The α estimate is –0.96 with a t-ratio of –1.21 and a p-value of 0.230. Thus,
29
Remember that the Stata command regress automatically includes a constant in the regression; thus, we do not need
to manually include it among the independent variables.
32
we cannot reject that the α estimate is different from 0, indicating that the Ford stock does not seem
to significantly outperform or underperform the overall market.
Assume we want to test that the value of the population coefficient on ‘ersandp’ is equal to 1. How
can we achieve this? The answer is to click on Statistics/Postestimation to launch Tests, contrasts,
and comparisons of parameter estimates/Linear tests of parameter estimates and then specify
Test type: Linear expressions are equal and Coefficient: ersandp. Finally, we need to define the
linear expression: ersandp=1.30 By clicking OK the F -statistics for this hypothesis test appears in
the Output window.
The F -statistic of 21.56 with a corresponding p-value of 0 (at least up to the fourth decimal point)
implying that the null hypothesis that the CAPM beta of Ford stock is 1 is convincingly rejected and
hence the estimated beta of 1.89 is significantly different from 1.31
30
Alternatively, just type test (ersandp=1) into the Command window and press Enter.
31
This is hardly surprising given the distance between 1 and 1.89. However, it is sometimes the case, especially if
the sample size is quite small and this leads to large standard errors, that many different hypotheses will all result in
non-rejection – for example, both H0 : β = 0 and H0 : β = 1 not rejected.
33
6 Sample Output for Multiple Hypothesis Tests
This example uses the ‘capm.dta’ workfile constructed in the previous section. So in case you are
starting a new session, re-load the Stata workfile and re-estimate the CAPM regression equation for the
Ford stock.32 If we examine the regression F -test (F-stat 97.26), this also shows that the regression
slope coefficient is significantly different from zero, which in this case is exactly the same result as the
t-test (t-stat 9.86) for the beta coefficient. Since in this instance there is only one slope coefficient, the
F -test statistic is equal to the square of the slope t-ratio.
Now suppose that we wish to conduct a joint test that both the intercept and slope parameters
are one. We would perform this test in a similar way to the test involving only one coefficient. First,
we launch the ‘Postestimation Selector’ by selecting Statistics/Postestimation. To open the spec-
ification window for the Wald test we choose Tests, contrasts, and comparisons of parameter
estimates/Linear tests of parameter estimates. We Create. . . the first restriction by selecting
the option Linear expressions are equal and as linear expression we specify ersandp=1. We click
OK. This is the first specification. In order to add the second specification, i.e., the coefficient on the
constant is 1 as well, we click on Create. . . again. In the Specification 2 dialogue box that appears
we select the Test type:Linear expressions are equal and specify the following linear expression
cons=1 in the dialog box. Once we have defined both specifications we click OK to generate the
F -test statistics.33
In the Output window above, Stata produces the familiar output for the F -test. However, we note that
the joint hypothesis test is indicated by the two conditions that are stated, ‘( 1) ersandp = 1’ and in the
next row ‘( 2) cons = 1’. Looking at the value of the F -statistic of 12.94 with a corresponding p-value
of 0.0000, we conclude that the null hypothesis, H0 : β1 = 1 and β2 = 1, is strongly rejected at the 1%
significance level.
32
To estimate the regression use the command regress erford ersandp.
33
You can also execute this command using the command line. You would use the command test (ersandp=1)
( cons=1). Note that it is important to set the parentheses around each of the terms as otherwise Stata will not execute
the command and produce an error message.
34
7 Multiple Regression Using an APT-Style Model
The following example will show how we can extend the linear regression model introduced in the
previous sections to estimate multiple regressions in Stata. In the spirit of arbitrage pricing theory
(APT), we will examine regressions that seek to determine whether the monthly returns on Microsoft
stock can be explained by reference to unexpected changes in a set of macroeconomic and financial
variables. For this, we rely on the dataset ‘macro.xls’ which contains 9 data series of financial and
economic variables as well as a date variable spanning the time period from March 1986 until March
2018 (i.e., 385 monthly observations for each of the series). In particular, the set of financial and
economic variables comprises the Microsoft stock price, the S&P500 index value, the consumer price
index, an industrial production index, Treasury bill yields for three months and ten years, a measure of
‘narrow’ money supply, a consumer credit series, and a ‘credit spread’ series. The latter is defined as
the difference in annualised average yields between a portfolio of bonds rated AAA and a portfolio of
bonds rated BAA.
Before we can start with our analysis we need to import the dataset ‘macro.xls’ into Stata and
adjust the ‘Date’ variable according to the steps outlined in previous sections.34 Remember to Save the
workfile as ‘macro.dta’.
Now that we have prepared our dataset we can start with the actual analysis. The first stage is to
generate a set of changes or differences for each of the variables, since the APT posits that the stock
returns can be explained by reference to the unexpected changes in the macroeconomic variables rather
than their levels. The unexpected value of a variable can be defined as the difference between the
actual (realised) value of the variable and its expected value. The question then arises about how we
believe that investors might have formed their expectations, and while there are many ways to construct
measures of expectations, the easiest is to assume that investors have naive expectations that the next
period value of the variable is equal to the current value. This being the case, the entire change in the
variable from one period to the next is the unexpected change (because investors are assumed to expect
no change).35
To transform the variables, we either use the Stata Menu ((Data/Create or change data/Create
new variable)) or we directly type the commands into the Command window:
generate dspread=BMINUSA-L.BMINUSA
generate dcredit=CCREDIT-L.CCREDIT
generate dprod=INDPRO-L.INDPRO
generate rmsoft=100*(ln(MICROSOFT/L.MICROSOFT))
generate rsandp=100*(ln(SANDP/L.SANDP))
generate dmoney=M1SUPPLY-L.M1SUPPLY
generate inflation=100*(ln(CPI/L.CPI))
34
Recall that we first need to transform the Date type from daily to monthly with replace Date=mofd(Date). Then
we format the Date variable into human-readable format with format Date %tm. Finally, we define the time variable
using tsset Date.
35
It is an interesting question as to whether the differences should be taken on the levels of the variables or their
logarithms. If the former, we have absolute changes in the variables, whereas the latter would lead to proportionate
changes. The choice between the two is essentially an empirical one, and this example assumes that the former is chosen,
apart from for the stock price series themselves and the consumer price series.
35
generate term=USTB10Y-USTB3M
and press Enter to execute them. Next we need to apply further transformations to some of the
transformed series, so we generate another set of variables:
generate dinflation=inflation-L.inflation
generate mustb3m=USTB3M/12
generate rterm=term-L.term
generate ermsoft=rmsoft-mustb3m
generate ersandp=rsandp-mustb3m
The final two of these calculate excess returns for the stock and for the index. We can now run the
regression. To open the regression specification window we click on Statistics/Linear models and
related/Linear regression. The variable whose behaviour we seek to explain is the excess return of
the Microsoft stock, so we select Dependent variable: ermsoft. The explanatory variables are the
excess market return (ersandp) as well as unexpected changes in: the industrial production (dprod),
the consumer credit (dcredit), the inflation rate (dinflation), the money supply (dmoney), the credit
spread (dspread), and the term spread (rterm). We type these variables into the Independent
variables dialog box or select them from the drop-down menu so that the entry in the box should look
like:
ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney dspread rterm
Note that you do not need to include a comma between the variables but only separate them using
a blank. Also remember that we do not manually include the constant term as Stata automatically
estimates the regression including a constant. Once you have included all variables just press OK and
the regression results will be reported in the Output window, as follows.
Take a few minutes to examine the main regression results. Which of the variables has a statistically
significant impact on the Microsoft excess returns? Using your knowledge of the effects of the financial
36
and macroeconomic environment on stock returns, examine whether the coefficients have their expected
signs and whether the sizes of the parameters are plausible.
Figure 28: Multiple Hypothesis Test for APT-Style Model
The regression F -statistic (top right, second row) takes a value of 28.24. Remember that this tests the
null hypothesis that all of the slope parameters are jointly zero. The p-value of zero attached to the test
statistic shows that this null hypothesis should be rejected. However, there are a number of parameter
estimates that are not significantly different from zero – specifically those on the ‘dprod’, ‘dcredit’,
‘dmoney’ and ‘dspread’ variables. Let us test the null hypothesis that the parameters on these four
variables are jointly zero using an F -test. To test this, we click on Statistics/Postestimation/Tests,
contrasts, and comparisons of parameter estimates/Linear tests of parameter estimates
and then select Create. . . . As testing the hypothesis that the coefficients are (jointly) zero is one of
the most common tests, there is a pre-defined option for this test available in Stata, namely the test
type Coefficients are 0 , as shown in Figure 28. We select this option and now all we need to do
is specify in the box at the bottom of the window the variable names we want to perform the test on
dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney dspread and press OK two times. We can now view the results
of this F -test in the Output window:
The resulting F -test statistic follows an F (4, 375) distribution as there are 4 restrictions, 383 usable
observations and 8 parameters to estimate in the unrestricted regression. The F -statistic value is 0.41
with p-value 0.7986, suggesting that the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. The parameters on ‘rterm’
and ‘dinflation’ are significant at the 10% level. Hence they are not included in this F -test and the
variables are retained.
37
7.1 Stepwise Regression
There are a number of different stepwise regression procedures, but the simplest is the uni-directional
forwards method. This starts with no variables in the regression (or only those variables that are always
required by the researcher to be in the regression) and then it selects first the variable with the lowest
p-value (largest t-ratio) if it were included, then the variable with the second lowest p-value conditional
upon the first variable already being included, and so on. The procedure continues until the next lowest
p-value relative to those already included variables is larger than some specified threshold value, then
the selection stops, with no more variables being incorporated into the model.
Figure 29: Stepwise Procedure Equation Estimation Window
We want to conduct a stepwise regression which will automatically select the most important variables
for explaining the variations in Microsoft stock returns. We click Statistics/Other and select Stepwise
estimation. A new dialog window appears (Figure 29). In Stata you need to specify each variable that
you want to stepwise-include as a separate term. We start with the first variable we want to include
which is ‘ersandp’. We keep the default option of Regression terms: Term 1 (required). Next
to this box we are asked to specify the regression Command that we want to perform the stepwise
estimation with and we select regress, i.e., a simple linear regression. Next, we select our Dependent
Variable: ermsoft as well as the first term to be included which is ersandp. Finally, we are asked
to select a significance level for removal from or addition to the model. We specify that we only want
to add a variable to a model if it is significant at least at the 20% level so we check the box next to
Significance level for addition to the model and input 0.2 in the text box below. To specify the
second variable that should be included we click on the drop-down menu in the Regression terms
box in the top left corner and select Term 2. We keep the command regress as well as the dependent
variable ermsoft and the Significance level for addition to the model: 0.2 and only change the
Term 2 to dprod. We keep including terms in this way until we have included all seven terms. Once
we have done so, we press OK to execute the command. The results are as below:
38
Note that a stepwise regression can be executed in different ways, e.g., either ‘forward’ or ‘backward’.
‘Forward’ will start with the list of required regressors (the intercept only in this case) and will sequen-
tially add to them, while ‘backward’ will start by including all of the variables and will sequentially
delete variables from the regression. The way we have specified our stepwise estimation we perform
a ‘forward’-selection estimation and only add a variable to the model if it is significant at the 20%
significance level, or higher.36
Turning to the results of the stepwise estimation, we find that the excess market return, the term
structure, and unexpected inflation variables have been included, while the money supply, default spread
and credit variables have been omitted.
36
We will not perform a backward-selection estimation. For details on the backward specification, refer to the chapter
on stepwise in the Stata Manual.
39
8 Quantile Regression
Brooks (2019, Section 4.10)
To illustrate how to run quantile regressions using Stata, we will now employ the simple CAPM beta
estimation conducted in a previous section. We re-open the ‘capm.dta’ workfile. We select Non-
parametric analysis/Quantile regression in the Statistics menu to open the quantile regression
specification window. We select erford as the Dependent Variable and ersandp as the Independent
Variable (Figure 30).
Figure 30: Quantile Regression Specification Window
As usual in Stata, we do not need to specify the constant as Stata will automatically include a constant
term. Finally, we can choose the Quantile to estimate. The default option is 50 which is the
median, but any integer values between 1 and 100 can be chosen. We can further customise the quantile
regressions using the different tabs but we will stick with the default settings and press OK to run the
regression. The output will appear as follows.
40
While this command only provides estimates for one particular quantile, we might be interested in
differences in the estimates across quantiles. Next, we generate estimates for a set of quantiles. To
run simultaneous quantile estimations, we click on Statistics/Nonparametric analysis and select
Simultaneous-quantile regression.
Figure 31: Specifying Simultaneous Quantile Regressions
In the regression specification window that appears we specify the regression parameters (Dependent
variable: erford ; Independent variables: ersandp) as well as the list of quantiles that we want to
simultaneously estimate (Figure 31). Let us assume we would like to generate estimates for 10 (evenly-
spaced) quantiles. Thus, we specify the following set of quantiles, separated by spaces: 10 20 30 40
50 60 70 80 90 and click OK in order to generate the estimation output on the next page.
41
For each quantile (q10 to q90), Stata reports two estimates together with their respective test statistics:
the β-coefficient on ‘ersandp’ and the coefficient for the constant term. Take some time to examine and
compare the coefficient estimates across quantiles. What do you observe? We find a monotonic rise in
the intercept coefficients as the quantiles increase. This is to be expected since the data on y have been
arranged that way. But the slope estimates are very revealing – they show that the beta estimate is
much higher in the lower tail than in the rest of the distribution of ordered data. Thus the relationship
42
between excess returns on Ford stock and those of the S&P500 is much stronger when Ford share prices
are falling most sharply. This is worrying, for it shows that the ‘tail systematic risk’ of the stock is
greater than for the distribution as a whole. This is related to the observation that when stock prices
fall, they tend to all fall at the same time, and thus the benefits of diversification that would be expected
from examining only a standard regression of y on x could be much overstated.
Figure 32: Equality of Quantile Estimates
Several diagnostics and specification tests for quantile regressions may be computed, and one of particular
interest is whether the coefficients for each quantile can be restricted to be the same. To perform the
equality test we rely on the test command that we have used in previous sections for testing linear
hypotheses. It can be accessed via Statistics/Postestimation/Tests, contrasts, and comparisons
of parameter estimates/Linear tests of parameter estimates. Note that it is important that the
last estimation that you performed was the simultaneous quantile regression as Stata always performs
hypothesis tests based on the most recent estimates. In the test specification window we click Create. . .
and choose the test type Linear expressions are equal (Figure 32, upper panel). We click on the
drop-down menu for Coefficient and select q10:ersandp, where [q10] indicates the coefficient estimate
from the regression based on the 10th quantile. Then we press Add and the coefficient estimate for
‘q10:ersandp’ appears in the ‘Linear expression’ box at the bottom. Next we select q20:ersandp and
also Add this variable to the ‘Linear expression’. Note that Stata automatically adds an ‘equal’ sign
between the two parameters. We keep doing this until we have included all 9 quantile estimates for
43
‘ersandp’ in the ‘Linear expression’. Then we click OK and we see that expression appears at the
bottom of the ‘test’ specification window (Figure 32, lower panel). Clicking OK again generates the
following test results.
We see that Stata has rearranged our initial test equation to express it in a way that makes it easier
for the program to execute the command. The rearrangement is innocuous and, in fact, allows Stata to
perform fairly complicated algebraic restrictions. In our case, we see that the test whether all coefficients
are equal is the same as testing whether the difference between the coefficient on ‘ersand’ for quantile
10 and the respective coefficient for each of the other quantiles is zero.37 Turning to the test-statistic we
find that the F -value is 1.46 with a p-value of 0.1727.38 In other words, we cannot reject the hypothesis
that all coefficient estimates are equal, although the F -statistic is close to being significant at the 10%
level. If we would have found that the coefficient estimates across quantiles was not equal, this would
have implied that the association between the excess returns of Ford stock and the S&P500 index would
vary depending on the part of the return distribution we are looking at, i.e., whether we are looking at
very negative or very positive excess returns.
37
To see that this is the case let us do some simple rearrangements. If all coefficients are equal then it has to be
the case that individual pairs of the set of coefficients are equal to one another, i.e., [q10]ersandp=[q20]ersandp and
[q10]ersandp=[q30]ersandp, etc. However, if the previous two equations are true, i.e., both [q20]ersandp and [q30]ersandp
are equal to [q10]ersandp, then this implies that [q20]ersandp=[q30]ersandp. Thus, in order to test the equality of all
coefficients to each other it is sufficient to test that all coefficients are equal to one specific coefficient, e.g., [q10]ersand.
Now, we can rearrange pairwise equalities by expression them as differences as [q10]ersandp=[q20]ersandp is the same as
writing [q10]ersandp-[q20]ersandp=0.
38
Remember that this statistic is based on a bootstrap and is hence subject to randomness. To make your results
replicable, type set seed 1 into the command Window before you run the regression.
44
9 Calculating Principal Components
Reading: Brooks (2019, Appendix 4.2)
In this section we will examine a set of interest rates of different maturities and calculate the principal
components for this set of variables in Stata. We can import the Treasury bill data directly from the
FRED data base. If we click File/Import/Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED), a panel will
open to choose the variables we are interested in (Figure 33, upper panel). By searching for ‘GS3M’,
we can add the 3-month Treasury Constant Maturity Rate to the series to import. Afterwards, we do
the same for the other maturities, GS6M, GS1, GS3, GS5, GS10, and click Import. This will open a
window (Figure 33, lower panel) to specify the data range and aggregation method. We set the data
range to ‘1982-01-01’ to ‘2018-05-31’ and use the monthly frequency with aggregation method ‘End of
Period’. After clicking OK, we can find the six series in the Variables window.39 .
Figure 33: Import Variables from the FRED Data Base

39
FRED also delivers two Variables for the dates (datestr and daten). They contain the underlying time-series in string
and numerical format. We do not need these for the remaining part of this exercise.
45
After saving the workfile as ‘fred.dta’, we click on Statistics in the Stata menu and select Mul-
tivariate analysis/Factor and principal component analysis/Principal component analysis
(PCA). A new window appears where we are asked to input the Variables for which we want to
generate principal components (Figure 34). We type in the six treasury bill rates GS3M GS6M GS1
GS3 GS5 GS10 and click OK.
Figure 34: Principal Component Analysis Specification Window
Note that there are multiple ways to customise the principal component analysis using the options in the
tabs. However, we keep the default settings for now. The results are presented in the Output window,
as shown below. The first panel lists the eigenvalues of the correlation matrix, ordered from largest to
smallest; the second panel reports the corresponding eigenvectors.
46
It is evident that there is a great deal of common variation in the series, since the first principal
component captures over 98% of the variation in the series and the first two components capture 99.9%.
Consequently, if we wished, we could reduce the dimensionality of the system by using two components
rather than the entire six interest rate series. Interestingly, the first component comprises almost exactly
equal weights in all six series while the second component puts a larger negative weight on the shortest
yield and gradually increasing weights thereafter. This ties in with the common belief that the first
component captures the level of interest rates, the second component captures the slope of the term
structure (and the third component captures curvature in the yield curve).
47
10 Diagnostic Testing
Reading: Brooks (2019, Chapter 5)
10.1 Testing for Heteroscedasticity

In this example we will undertake a test for heteroscedasticity in Stata, using the ‘macro.dta’ workfile.
We will inspect the residuals of the APT-style regression of the excess return of Microsoft shares,
‘ermsoft’, on unexpected changes in a set of financial and macroeconomic variables, which we have
estimated above. Thus, the first step is to reproduce the regression results. The simplest way is to
re-estimate the regression by typing the command
regress ermsoft ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney dspread rterm
in the Command window and press Enter. This time we are less interested in the coefficient estimates
reported in the Output window, but we focus on the properties of the residuals from this regression. To
get a first impression about the properties of the residuals we want to plot them. When Stata performs
an estimation it keeps specific estimates in its memory which can then be used in postestimation anal-
ysis; among them the residuals of a regression. To obtain the residuals we use the command predict
which allows us to create a variable of the predicted variables in memory.40 We click on Statistic-
s/Postestimation and in the ‘Postestimation Selector’ we select Predictions and Predictions and
their SEs, leverage statistics, distance statistics, etc. (Figure 35).
Figure 35: Postestimation Selector for Predictions
In the ‘predict’ specification window that appears we name the residual series we want to generate in
the New variable name: box as resid and select the option Residuals which specifies that the new
‘resid’ series should contain the (unadjusted) residuals (Figure 36). By pressing OK we should find
that the variable ‘resid’ now appears as a new variable in the Variables window.
40
For more information about the functionalities of predict, refer to the respective entry in the Stata Manual.
48
Figure 36: Obtaining Residuals after Estimation
To plot this series we simply select Graphics/Time-series graphs/Line plots, click on Create. . .
and in the new window we select resid as the Y Variable. Clicking Accept and then OK should
generate a time-series plot of the residual series, similar to Figure 37.41
Let us examine the pattern of residuals over time. If the residuals of the regression have systematically
changing variability over the sample, that is a sign of heteroscedasticity. In this case, it is hard to see
any clear pattern (although it is interesting to note the considerable reduction in volatility post-2003),
so we need to run the formal statistical test.
Figure 37: Time-Series Plot of Residuals
To do so we click on Statistics/Postestimation and then select Specification, diagnostic, and

goodness-of-fit analysis/Tests for heteroskedasticity (Figure 38, left panel). In the ‘estat’ speci-
fication window, we are first asked to select the type of Reports and statistics (subcommand) as
in the right panel of Figure 38. The default option is Tests for heteroskedasticity (hettest) which
41
Alternatively, you can directly use the command twoway (tsline resid) to generate the residual plot, after having
generated the ‘resid’ series using the command predict resid, residuals.
49
is exactly the command that we are looking for; thus we do not make any changes at this stage. Next
we specify the type of heteroscedasticity test to compute using the drop-down menu next to Test to
compute. We can choose between three options: (1) the (original) Breusch-Pagan/Cook-Weisberg
test, which assumes that the regression disturbances are normally distributed; (2) the N*R2 version
of the score test that drops the normality assumption; (3) the F-statistic version which also drops
the normality assumption. Let us start by selecting the Breusch-Pagan/Cook-Weisberg test.
Figure 38: Specification Window for Heteroscedasticity Tests
Before we start, we need to tick Use right-hand-side variables in the test. This ensures the residual
variances will be regressed on the variables of the previous regression. Clicking OK will generate the
50
test statistics in the Output window displayed above.
As you can see the null hypothesis is one of constant variance, i.e., homoscedasticity. With a χ2 -value
of 6.31 and a corresponding p-value of 0.5037, the Beusch-Pagan/Cook-Weisberg test suggests not to
reject the null hypothesis of constant variance of the residuals. To test the robustness of this result to
alternative distributional assumptions, we can also run the other two test types. Below is the output
for all three tests. As you can see from the test statistics and p-values, both of the other tests confirm
the result and suggest that there is not a problem of heteroscedastic errors for our APT-style model.
10.2 Using White’s Modified Standard Error Estimates

Reading: Brooks (2019, Subsection 5.4.3)
We can estimate the regression with heteroscedasticity-robust standard errors in Stata. When we open
the regress specification window we see different tabs. So far we have only focused on the Model tab
that specifies the dependent and independent variables. If we move to the SE/Robust tab, we are
presented with different options for adjusting the standard errors (Figure 39).
Figure 39: Adjusting Standard Errors for OLS Regressions
In order to obtain standard errors that are robust to heteroscedasticity we select the option Robust.
Beneath the selection box, three Bias correction options appear. We keep the default option.42
Comparing the regression output for our APT-style model using robust standard errors with that
using ordinary standard errors (see Section 7 of this guide), we find that the changes in significance are
only marginal, as shown in the output below using robust standard errors.
42
Alternatively, you can directly adjust the estimation command in the Command window to account for robust standard
errors by adding ‘, vce(robust)’ at the end of the command, i.e., regress ermsoft ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney
dspread rterm, vce(robust). For more information on the different standard error adjustments, refer to the entries regress
and vce option in the Stata Manual.
51
Of course, only the standard errors have changed and the parameter estimates remain identical to those
estimated before. However, this has not resulted in changes about the conclusions reached about the
significance of any variable.
10.3 The Newey–West Procedure for Estimating Standard Errors

Reading: (Brooks (2019, Subsection 5.5.7)
In this subsection, we will apply the Newey–West procedure for estimating heteroscedasticity and au-
tocorrelation robust standard errors in Stata. Unlike the robust standard error adjustment which is an
optional feature within the basic regress command, the Newey–West procedure is based on a separate
estimator and thus a separate Stata command.
Figure 40: Specifiying Regressions with Newey–West Standard Errors
52
To access this command, we select Statistics/Time series/Regressions with Newey-West std.
errors. In the window that appears, we are first asked to define the dependent variable and the
independent variables, as shown in Figure 40.
Then we are asked to specify the Maximum lag to consider in the autocorrelation structure,
i.e., we manually input the maximum number of lagged residuals that should be considered for inclusion
in the model. There might be different economic motivations for choosing the maximum lag length,
depending on the specific analysis one is undertaking. In our example we decide to include a maximum
lag length of six, implying that we assume that the potential autocorrelation in our data does not go
beyond the window of six months.43 By clicking OK, the following regression results appear in the
Output window.
10.4 Autocorrelation and Dynamic Models

Reading: Brooks (2019, Subsections 5.5.7 – 5.5.11)
In Stata, the lagged values of variables can be used as regressors or for other purposes by using the no-
tation L.x for a one-period lag, L5.x for a five-period lag, and so on, where x is the variable name. Stata
will automatically adjust the sample period used for estimation to take into account the observations
that are lost in constructing the lags. For example, if the regression contains five lags of the dependent
variable, five observations will be lost and estimation will commence with observation six. Additionally,
Stata also accounts for missing observations when using the time operator L. Note, however, that in
order to use the time operator L. it is essential to set the time variable in the dataset using the command
tsset. In this section, we want to apply different tests for autocorrelation in Stata, using the APT-style
model of the previous section (‘macro.dta’ workfile).44
The simplest test for autocorrelation is due to Durbin and Watson (1951). To access the Durbin-
Watson (DW ) test, we use the ‘Postestimation Selector’ via Statistics/Postestimation and then
select Durbin-Watson d statistic to test for first-order serial correlation under the category
43
Note that if we were to specify No autocorrelation structure the Newey–West adjusted standard errors would be
the same as the robust standard errors introduced in the previous section.
44
Note that it is important that the last model you have estimated is regress ermsoft ersandp dprod dcredit
dinflation dmoney dspread rterm.
53
Specification, diagnostic, and comparisons of parameter estimates (Figure 41).
Figure 41: Postestimation Selector for the Durbin-Watson Test
Next we click OK as the correct option has already been pre-selected, i.e., Durbin-Watson d
statistic(dwatson - time series only). The following test results will appear in the Output window.
The value of the DW statistic is 2.10. What is the appropriate conclusion regarding the presence
or otherwise of first order autocorrelation in this case? An alternative test for autocorrelation is the
Breusch–Godfrey test. It is a more general test for autocorrelation than DW and allows to test for higher
order autocorrelation. In Stata, the Breusch–Godfrey test can be conducted by selecting Breusch-
Godfrey test for higher-order serial correlation in the ‘Postestimation Selector’. Again, the
correct option Breusch-Godfrey test (bgodfrey - time series only) is pre-selected and we only
need to Specify a list of lag orders to be tested. Assuming that we select to employ 10 lags in the
test, the results should appear as below.
54
10.5 Testing for Non-Normality
One of the most commonly applied tests for normality is the Jarque–Bera (JB) test.45 Assume we would
like to test whether the normality assumption is satisfied for the residuals of the APT-style regression of
Microsoft stock on the unexpected changes in the financial and economic factors, i.e., the ‘resid’ variable
that we have created in subsection 10.1. Before calculating the actual test-statistic, it might be useful
to have a look at the data as this might give us a first idea whether the residuals might be normally
distributed. If the residuals follow a normal distribution we expect a histogram of the residuals to be
bell-shaped (with no outliers). To create a histogram of the residuals we click on Graphics and select
Histogram. In the window that appears we are asked to select the variable for which we want to
generate the histogram (Figure 42, left panel).
Figure 42: Generating a Histogram of Residuals
In our case we define Variable: resid. Our data are continuous so we do not need to make any changes
regarding the data type. In the bottom left of the window we can specify the number of bins and as
well as the width of the bins. We stick with the default settings for now and click OK to generate the
histogram (Figure 42, right panel).
Looking at the histogram plot we see that the distribution of the residuals roughly resembles a
bell-shape, although we also find that there are some large negative outliers which might lead to a
considerable negative skewness of the data series. We could increase the number of bins or lower the
width of bins in order to get a more differentiated histogram.
However, if we want to test the normality assumption of the disturbances more formally it is best to
turn to a quantitative normality test. The standard test for the normality of a data series in Stata is
the Skewness and kurtosis test (sktest), which is a variation of the Jarque–Bera test. ‘sktest’ presents
a test for normality based on skewness and another based on kurtosis and then combines the two tests
into an overall test statistic. In contrast to the traditional Jarque–Bera test, which is also based on
the skewness and kurtosis of a data series, the sktest in Stata corrects for the small sample bias of the
Jarque–Bera test by using a bootstrapping procedure. Thus it proves to be a particularly useful test if
the sample size of the data analysed is small. To access the ‘sktest’ we click on Statistics/Summaries,
tables, and tests/Distributional plots and tests/Skewness and kurtosis test for normality.
45
For more information on the intuition behind the Jarque–Bera test, refer to chapter 5 in Brooks (2019).
55
In the test specification window, we define the variable on which we want to perform the normality test
as resid (Figure 43).
Figure 43: Specifying the Normality Test
The Royston adjustment is for the small sample bias. For now, we keep the Royston adjustment and
do not check the box to suppress it. Instead, we press OK to generate the following test statistics:
Stata reports the probabilities that the skewness of the residuals resembles that of a normal distribution.
Additionally, it reports the adjusted χ2 value and p-value for the test that the residuals are overall
normally distributed, i.e., that both the kurtosis and the skewness are those of the normal distribution.
On the one hand, we find that the test for skewness does not reject the normality assumption of a zero
skewness. On the other hand, the test strongly rejects the assumption of a kurtosis equal to three.
The hypothesis that both kurtosis and skewness jointly resembles those of a normal distribution can be
strongly rejected. We can check whether our results change if we do not apply the Royston adjustment
for small sample bias. To do this, we check the box Suppress Royston adjustment in the specification
window for the normality test. However, our overall conclusion is unchanged.
What could cause this strong deviation from normality? Having another look at the histogram, it
appears to have been caused by a small number of very large negative residuals representing monthly
stock price falls of more than 20%.
10.6 Dummy Variable Construction and Application

Reading: Brooks (2019, Subsection 5.7.2)
As we saw from the plot of the distribution above, the non-normality in the residuals from the Microsoft
regression appears to have been caused by a small number of outliers in the sample. Such events
can be identified if they are present by plotting the actual values and the residuals of the regression.
56
We have already generated a data series containing the residuals of the Microsoft regression. Let us
now create a series of the fitted values. For this, we use the predict command again by opening the
‘Postestimation Selector’ (Statistics/Postestimation) and selecting Predictions/Predictions and
their SEs, leverage statistics, distance statistics, etc.. In the specification window, we name the
variable fitted and define that it should contain the Linear prediction for the Microsoft regression
(first option in list list named Produce) (Figure 44). Then we only need to click OK and we should
find a new variable named fitted in the Variables window.
Figure 44: Generating a Series of Fitted Values
In order to plot both the residuals and fitted values in one times-series graph we select Graphics/Time-
series graphs/Line plots. In the specification window, we press Create. . . and define the Y variable
to be resid while keeping the other default selections. Then we press Accept. Next we click on
Create. . . again. Now we choose our Y variable to be fitted. Again, we keep all default options and
press Accept to return to the main specification window. You should now see that there are two plots
specified, Plot 1 and Plot 2. By clicking OK, Stata produces a time-series plot of the residual and
fitted values that should resemble that in Figure 45.
From the graph, it can be seen that there are several large (negative) outliers, but the largest of all
occur in 2000. All of the large outliers correspond to months where the actual return was much smaller
(i.e., more negative) than the model would have predicted, resulting in a large residual. Interestingly,
the residual in October 1987 is not quite so prominent because even though the stock price fell, the
market index value fell as well, so that the stock price fall was at least in part predicted.
57
Figure 45: Regression Residuals and Fitted Series
In order to identify the exact dates that the biggest outliers were realised, it is probably easiest to just
examine a table of values for the residuals, which can be achieved by changing to the Data Editor view
(i.e., pressing the Data Editor symbol in the Stata menu or entering edit into the command window and
pressing Enter). We can now sort the data by residuals in order to directly spot the largest negative
values. To do so we click on Data/Sort. In the ‘sort’ specification window we keep the default option
Standard sort (ascending) and only specify the variable based on which we want to sort the dataset,
which is resid in our case (Figure 46). Then we press OK in order to execute the sorting. Now the
dataset should be sorted by ‘resid’, starting with the lowest values and ending with the highest values
for ‘resid’. If we do this, it is evident that the two most extreme residuals were in April (−36.075) and
December 2000 (−28.143).
Figure 46: Sorting Data by Values of Residuals
One way of removing the (distorting) effect of big outliers in the data is by using dummy variables.
It would be tempting, but incorrect, to construct one dummy variable that takes the value 1 for both
April 2000 and December 2000, but this would not have the desired effect of setting both residuals to
58
zero. Instead, to remove two outliers requires us to construct two separate dummy variables. In order
to create the Apr 00 dummy first, we generate a series called ‘APR00DUM’. To do this we return to the
main Stata screen and click on Data/Create or change data/Create new variable. In the variable
specification window, we change the Variable type to byte (as dummy variables are binary variables)
and define Variable name: APR00DUM (Figure 47).
Figure 47: Creating a Dummy Variable for Outliers
Now we need to specify the content of the variable, which we do in the following way: In the Specify
a value or an expression box we type in:
Date == tm(2000m4)
which means that the new variable takes the value 1, if the Date is equal to 2000m4 and 0 otherwise.
Note that the function tm() is used to allow us to type the Date as a human-readable date instead of
the coded Stata value.
We can check whether the dummy is correctly specified by visually inspecting the APR00DUM
series in the Data Editor. There should only be one single observation for which the dummy takes the
value of one, which is April 2000, whereas it should be zero for all other dates. We repeat the process
above to create another dummy variable called ‘DEC00DUM’ that takes the value 1 in December
2000 and zero elsewhere.
Let us now re-run the regression to see whether the results change after removing the effect of the
two largest outliers. For this we just add the two dummy variables APR00DUM and DEC00DUM
to the list of independent variables. This can most easily be achieved by looking for the regression
command in the Review window. By clicking on it the command reappears in the Command window.
We add APR00DUM and DEC00DUM at the end of the equation. The output of this regression
should look as follows.
59
Note that the dummy variable parameters are both highly significant and take approximately the values
that the corresponding residuals would have taken if the dummy variables had not been included in
the model.46 By comparing the results with those of the regression above that excluded the dummy
variables, it can be seen that the coefficient estimates on the remaining variables change quite a bit in
this instance. The inflation parameter is now insignificant and the R2 value has risen from 0.34 to 0.41
because of the perfect fit of the dummy variables to those two extreme outlying observations.
Finally, we can re-examine the normality test results of the residuals based on this new model spec-
ification. First we have to create the new residual series by opening the ‘predict’ specification window
(Statistics/Postestimation/Predictions/Predictions and their SEs, leverage statistics, dis-
tance statistics, etc.). We name the new residual series resid new and select the second Produce
option Residuals. Then we re-run the Skewness and Kurtosis test (sktest) on this new series of resid-
uals using Statistics/Summaries, tables, and tests/Distributional plots and tests/Skewness
and kurtosis normality test. Note that we can test both versions, with and without the Royston
adjustment for small sample bias.
We see that now the skewness test also strongly rejects the normality assumption with a p-value
of 0.0016. The residuals are still a long way from following a normal distribution, and that the joint
null hypothesis of normality is still strongly rejected, probably because there are still several very large
outliers. While it would be possible to continue to generate dummy variables, there is a limit to the
extent to which it would be desirable to do so. With this particular regression, we are unlikely to be
able to achieve a residual distribution that is close to normality without using an excessive number of
dummy variables. As a rule of thumb, in a monthly sample with 381 observations, it is reasonable to
include, perhaps, two or three dummy variables for outliers, but more would probably be excessive.
46
Note the inexact correspondence between the values of the residuals and the values of the dummy variable parameters
because two dummies are being used together; had we included only one dummy, the value of the dummy variable
coefficient and that which the residual would have taken would be identical.
60
10.7 Multicollinearity
Let us assume that we would like to test for multicollinearity issues in the Microsoft regression (‘macro.dta’
workfile). To generate a correlation matrix in Stata, we click on Statistics/Summaries, tables, and
test/Summary and descriptive statistics/Correlations and covariances. In the Variables di-
alog box we enter the list of regressors (not including the regressand or the S&P500 returns), as in
Figure 48.
Figure 48: Generating a Correlation Matrix
After clicking OK, the following correlation matrix appears in the Output window.
Do the results indicate any significant correlations between the independent variables? In this particular
case, the largest observed correlations (in absolute value) are 0.17 between the money supply and spread
variables, and –0.23 between the spread and unexpected inflation. These figures are probably sufficiently
small that they can reasonably be ignored.
10.8 The RESET Test for Functional Form

61
To conduct the RESET test for our Microsoft regression we open the ‘Postestimation Selector’ and
under Specification, diagnostic, and goodness-of-fit analysis we select Ramsey regression
specification-error test for omitted variables (Figure 49).
Figure 49: Specifying the RESET Test
In the ‘estat’ specification window that appears the correct option is already pre-selected from
the drop-down menu and we simply press OK. Stata reports the F (3, 372)-value for the test of the
null hypothesis that the model is correctly specified and has no omitted variables, i.e., the coefficient
estimates on the powers of the higher order terms of the fitted values are zero:
Since the F -statistic has three degrees of freedom, we can infer that Stata included up to three powers of
the fitted values, ŷ 2 , ŷ 3 and ŷ 4 , in auxiliary the regressions. With an F -value of 0.99 and a corresponding
p-value of 0.3957, the RESET test results imply that we cannot reject the null hypothesis that the model
has no omitted variables. In other words, we do not find strong evidence that the chosen linear functional
form of the model is incorrect.
10.9 Stability Tests

There are two types of stability tests that we want to apply: the Chow (analysis of variance) test and the
predictive failure test. To access the Chow test, we open the ‘Postestimation Selector’ (Statistics/Postestimatio
and select Specification, diagnostic, and goodness-of-fit analysis. Note that it is not possible
62
to conduct a Chow test or a parameter stability test when there are outlier dummy variables in the
regression. Thus, we have to ensure that the last estimation that we run is the Microsoft regression
omitting the APR00DUM and DEC00DUM dummies from the list of independent variables.47 This
occurs because when the sample is split into two parts, the dummy variable for one of the parts will
have values of zero for all observations, which would thus cause perfect multicollinearity with the column
of ones that is used for the constant term. Looking at the ‘Postestimation Selector’, we see that there
are two tests for structural breaks, one which tests for structural breaks with a known break date and
one test for structural breaks when the break date is unknown. Let us first run Tests for structural
break with a known break date by selecting the corresponding option (Figure 50, left panel). In
the specification window that appears, we are now asked to specify the ‘Hypothesized break dates’
(Figure 50, right panel).
Figure 50: Specifying a Test for Structural Breaks with a Known Break Date
Let us assume that we want to test whether a breakpoint occurred in January 1996, which is roughly
in the middle of the sample period. Thus, we specify Hypothesized break dates: tm(1996m1).
Note that the ‘tm()’ is used to tell Stata that the term in the brackets is formatted as a monthly date
variable. In the box entitled Break variables we could select specific variables of the model to be
included in the test. By default, all coefficients are tested. As we do not have any priors as to which
variables might be subject to a structural break and which are not, we leave this box empty, and simply
press OK to generate the following test statistics.
47
The corresponding command for this regression is: regress ermsoft ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney dspread
rterm.
63
The output presents the statistics of a Wald test of whether the coefficients in the Microsoft regression
vary between the two subperiods, i.e., before and after 1996m1. The null hypothesis is one of no
structural break. We find that the χ2 value is 15.3223 and that the corresponding p-value is 0.0532.
Thus, we can reject the null hypothesis that the parameters are constant across the two subsamples at
the 10% level.
Often, the date when the structural break occurs is not known in advance. Stata offers a variation of
the above test that does not require us to specify the break date but tests for each possible break date in
the sample. This test can be accessed via the ‘Postestimation Selector’ as Test for a structural break
with an unknown break date (second option, see Figure 50, left panel). When selecting this option
a new specification window appears where we can specify the test for a structural break (Figure 51).
Figure 51: Specifying a Test for Structural Breaks with an Unknown Break Date
However, for now we keep the default specifications and simply press OK to generate the test
statistics below.
64
Again the null hypothesis is one of no structural breaks. The test statistic and the corresponding p-value
suggest that we can reject the null hypothesis that the coefficients are stable over time, confirming that
our model has a structural break. The test suggests May 2001 as the break date.
Another way of testing whether the parameters are stable with respect to any break dates is to use
one of the tests based on recursive estimation. Unfortunately, there is no built-in function in Stata that
automatically produces plots of the recursive coefficient estimates together with standard error bands.
In order to visually investigate the parameter stability, we have to run recursive estimations and save
the parameter estimates (in a new file). Then we can plot these data series.
To do so, we first select Statistics/Time series/Rolling-window and recursive estimation.
In the specification window that appears we are first asked to specify the Stata command to run
which in our case is the base line regression command that we have been using in the previous models
(Figure 52, upper panel). So we just type: regress ermsoft ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation
dmoney dspread rterm
Next we need to specify the parameters that we would like to be saved from the recursive regressions.
As we want to obtain both the Model coefficients and the SE of model coefficients, i.e., the standard
errors, we check both boxes. We also need to specify the window over which we would like to estimate
the recursive regressions, i.e., the number of observations over which the estimation will start. We
specify the window to be 11, although some other starting point could have been chosen. As we want
to estimate recursive regressions, that is Stata gradually adds one further observation to the data subset,
we need to check the box Use recursive samples.
As a default for recursive regressions, Stata replaces the data in our workfile with the recursive
estimates. As we want to keep the data in our workfile, we need to tell Stata to save the recursive
estimates in a new file. To do so, we click on the tab Options and select Save results to file
(Figure 52, lower panel). We name the new file recursive estimates.dta. Stata gives us several
further options, e.g., to specify the steps of the recursive estimations or the start and end date; but we
leave the specifications as they are and press OK to generate the recursive estimates.
65
Figure 52: Specifying Recursive Regressions
As you can see from the Output window, Stata does not report the regression results for each of the
373 recursive estimations, but produces a ‘.’ for each regression. To access the recursive estimates,
we would need to open the new workfile ‘recursive estimates.dta’ that should be stored in the
same folder as the original workfile ‘macro.dta’. You can open it by double-clicking on the file. The
‘recursive estimates.dta’ workfile contains several data series: start and end contain the start date
and the end date over which the respective parameters have been estimated; b ersandp, for example,
contains the recursive coefficient estimates for the excess S&P500 returns, while se ersandp contains
the corresponding standard errors of the coefficient estimates.
In order to visually investigate the parameter stability over the recursive estimations, it is best to
generate a time-series plot of the recursive estimates. Assume that we would like to generate such a plot
for the recursive estimates of ersandp. We would like to plot the actual recursive coefficients together
with standard error bands. So first, we need to generate data series for the standard error bands. We
decide to generate two series: one for a deviation of 2 standard errors above the coefficient estimate
( b ersandp plus2SE) and one for a deviation of 2 standard errors below the coefficient estimate
( b ersandp minus2SE). To do so, we use the following two commands to generate the two series:
66
generate b ersandp plus2SE = b ersandp + 2* se ersandp
generate b ersandp minus2SE = b ersandp - 2* se ersandp
Once we have generated the new variables, we can plot them together with the actual recursive coeffi-
cients of ‘ersandp’. We click on Graphics/Time-series graphs/Line plots. In the graph specification
window we click on Create. . . to specify the first data series which comprises the recursive coefficient
estimates for ‘ersandp’ ( b ersandp). In the dialogue box named Y variable we type in ( b ersandp)
and click on Line properties to format this particular data series (Figure 53, top two panels).
Figure 53: Generating a Plot for the Parameter Stability Test
We change the Color to Blue and the Pattern to Solid and press Accept. Then we press Accept
again to return to the main graph specification window. We now click on Create. . . to specify the next
series to be included in the graph which is the positive 2 standard error series ( b ersandp plus2SE).
We select this variable from the drop-down menu and click on Line properties. For this data se-
ries, we select the Color to be Red and the Pattern to be Dash and click Accept twice to re-
turn to the main specification window. We generate Plot 3 of the negative 2 standard error series
( b ersandp minus2SE) in a similar way as the previous series, again selecting Color: Red and
Pattern: Dash. Finally, we need to specify the time variable by clicking on Time settings. . . in the
67
main specification window. In the auxiliary window that appears we define the Time variable to be
end and click OK (Figure 53, bottom panel). Now that we have specified all graph characteristics we
simply need to press OK to generate the graph.
Figure 54: Plot of the Parameter Stability Test
What do we observe from the graph in Figure 54? The coefficients of the first couple of subsamples
seem to be relatively unstable with large standard error bands while they seem to stabilise after a short
period of time and only show small standard error bands. This pattern is to be expected as it takes
some time for the coefficients to stabilise since the first few sets are estimated using very small samples.
Given this, the parameter estimates are remarkably stable. We can repeat this process for the recursive
estimates of the other variables to see whether they show similar stability over time.
Figure 55: CUSUM Test for Parameter Stability Test
Another option is to run a so called CUSUM test. Therefore, we reopen the ’macro.dta’ file and run
68
the linear regression again. Afterwards we open the Postestimation Selector (Figure 55, left panel) and
launch the command Specification, diagnostic, and goodness-of-fit-analysis/Cumulative sum
test for parameter stability. We keep the default settings as they are presented in the right panel
of Figure 55 and click OK.
Figure 56: CUSUM Plot
The graph in Figure 56 will pop up. For most of the time the test statistic is within the 95% confidence
bands which means we cannot reject the null hypothesis of stable parameters. However, the values are
close to the critical value and in the period around 2010 we reject the null hypothesis.
69
11 Constructing ARMA Models
Reading: Brooks (2019, Sections 6.4 – 6.7)
This example uses the monthly UK house price series which was already incorporated in a Stata workfile
in section 2 (‘ukhp.dta’). So first we re-load the workfile into Stata. There are a total of 326 monthly
observations running from February 1991 (recall that the January observation was ‘lost’ in constructing
the lagged value) to March 2018 for the percentage change in house price series. The objective of this
exercise is to build an ARMA model for the house price changes. Recall that there are three stages
involved: identification, estimation, and diagnostic checking. The first stage is carried out by looking
at the autocorrelation and partial autocorrelation coefficients to identify any structure in the data.
11.1 Estimating Autocorrelation Coefficients

To generate a table of autocorrelations, partial correlations and related test statistics we click on Statis-
tics/Time series/Graphs and select the option Autocorrelations & partial autocorrelations. In
the specification window that appears we select dhp as the variable for which we want to generate the
above statistics and specify that we want to use 12 lags as the specified number of autocorrelations
(Figure 57).
Figure 57: Generating a Correlogram
By clicking OK, the correlogram appears in the Stata Output window, as given below.48
48
Note that the graphs for the AC and PAC values are very small. You can generate individual graphs for the AC and
PAC including confidence bands by selecting Statistics/Time series/Graphs/Correlogram (ac) and Statistics/-
Time series/Graphs/Partial correlogram (pac), respectively.
70
It is clearly evident that the series is quite persistent given that it is already in percentage change
form. The autocorrelation function dies away rather slowly. Only the first two partial autocorrelation
coefficients appear strongly significant. The numerical values of the autocorrelation and partial autocor-
relation coefficients at lags 1–12 are given in the columns (2) and (3) of the output, with the lag length
given in column (1).49
Remember that as a rule of thumb, a given autocorrelation coefficient is classed as significant if it is
outside a ±1.96 × 1/(T )1/2 band, where T is the number of observations. In this case, it would imply
that a correlation coefficient is classed as significant if it is bigger than approximately 0.11 or smaller
than –0.11. The band is of course wider when the sampling frequency is monthly, as it is here, rather
than daily where there would be more observations. It can be deduced that the first six autocorrelation
coefficients (then nine through twelve) and the first two partial autocorrelation coefficients (then nine,
eleven, and twelve) are significant under this rule. Since the first acf coefficient is highly significant,
the joint test statistic presented in column (4) rejects the null hypothesis of no autocorrelation at the
1% level for all numbers of lags considered. It could be concluded that a mixed ARMA process might
be appropriate, although it is hard to precisely determine the appropriate order given these results. In
order to investigate this issue further, information criteria are now employed.
11.2 Using Information Criteria to Decide on Model Orders

An important point to note is that books and statistical packages often differ in their construction of the
test statistic. For example, the formulae given in (Brooks, 2019) for Akaike’s and Schwarz’s Information
Criteria are
2k
AIC = ln(σ̂ 2 ) + (2)
T
k
SBIC = ln(σ̂ 2 ) + ln(T ) (3)
T
where σ̂ 2 is the estimator of the variance of regressions disturbances ut , k is the number of parameters
and T is the sample size. When using the criterion based on the estimated standard errors, the model
with the lowest value of AIC and SBIC should be chosen. On the other hand, Stata uses a formulation
49
The right-hand side of the output measures the coefficients on a scale from –1 to 1 and gives a quick indication which
lags are significantly large.
71
of the test-statistic based on maximum likelihood estimation. The corresponding Stata formulae are
AICL = −2 · ln(L) + 2k (4)

SBICL = −2 · ln(L) + k ln(T ), (5)
where ln(L) is the maximised log-likelihood of the model.

Unfortunately, this modification is not benign, since it affects the relative strength of the penalty
term compared with the error variance, sometimes leading different packages to select different model
orders for the same data and criterion!
Figure 58: Specifying an ARMA(1,1) Model
Suppose it is thought that ARMA models from order (0,0) to (5,5) are plausible for the house price
changes. This would entail considering 36 models (ARMA(0,0), ARMA(1,0), ARMA(2,0), . . . , ARMA(5,5)),
i.e., from zero up to 5 lags in both the autoregressive and moving average terms.
In Stata, this can be done by separately estimating each of the models and noting down the value
of the information criteria in each case. We can do this in the following way. From the Stata main
menu, we click on Statistics/Time series and select ARIMA and ARMAX models. In the
specification window that appears we select Dependent variable: dhp and leave the dialogue box for
the independent variables empty as we only want to include autoregressive and moving-average terms but
no other explanatory variables. We are then asked to specify the ARMA model. There are three boxes in
which we can type in the number of either the autoregressive order (p), the integrated (difference) order
(d) or the moving-average order (q). As we want to start with estimating an ARMA(1,1) model, i.e.,
a model of autoregressive order 1 and moving-average order 1, we specify this in the respective
boxes (Figure 58). An equivalent formulation would be:
∆HPt = µ + ϕ∆HPt−1 + θt−1 + t , (6)
with mean µ, AR coefficient ϕ and MA coefficient θ. We click OK and Stata generates the following
estimation output.
72
In theory, the output would be discussed in a similar way to the simple linear regression model discussed
in Section 3 of this guide. However, in reality it is very difficult to interpret the parameter estimates in
the sense of, for example, saying ‘a 1 unit increase in x leads to a β unit increase in y’. In part because
the construction of ARMA models is not based on any economic or financial theory, it is often best not
to even try to interpret the individual parameter estimates, but rather to examine the plausibility of the
model as a whole, and to determine whether it describes the data well and produces accurate forecasts
(if this is the objective of the exercise, which it often is). Note also that the header of the Stata output
for ARMA models states the number of iterations that have been used in the model estimation process.
This shows that, in fact, an iterative numerical optimisation procedure has been employed to estimate
the coefficients. Stata also automatically adjusts the computation of standard errors according to the
optimisation technique used. As we use the Berndt–Hall-Hall-Hausman algorithm which is the default
method (‘bhhh’), the reported standard errors are Outer product gradient (OPG) errors.
In order to generate the information criteria corresponding to the ARMA(1,1) model we open the
‘Postestimation Selector’ (Statistics/Postestimation) and select Specification, diagnostic, and
goodness-of-fit analysis (Figure 59, left panel). In the specification window, the correct subcommand
information criteria (ic) is already pre-selected (Figure 59, right panel). We can specify the number
of observations for calculating the SBIC (Schwartz criterion), though we keep the default option which
is all 268 observations.
73
Figure 59: Generating Information Criteria for the ARMA(1,1) Model
By clicking OK the following test statistics are generated.
We see that the AIC has a value of 933.42 and the BIC a value of 948.57. However, by themselves these
two statistics are relatively meaningless for our decision as to which ARMA model to choose. Instead,
we need to generate these statistics for the competing ARMA models and then select the model with
the lowest information criterion.
To check that the process implied by the model is stationary and invertible, it is useful to look
at the inverses of the AR and MA roots of the characteristic equation. If the inverse roots of the
AR polynomial all lie inside the unit circle, the process is stationary, invertible, and has an infinite-
order moving-average (MA) representation. We can test this by selecting Diagnostic and analytic
plots/Check stability condition of estimates in the ‘Postestimation Selector’ (Figure 60, upper
left panel). In the specification window that appears, we tick the box Label eigenvalues with the
distance from the unit circle and click OK (Figure 60, upper right panel). From the test output
we see that the inverted roots for both the AR and MA parts lie inside the unit circle and have a
distance from the circle of 0.178 and 0.458, respectively (Figure 60, bottom panel). Thus the conditions
of stationarity and invertibility, respectively, are met.
74
Figure 60: Testing the Stability Condition for the ARMA(1,1) Estimates
Repeating these steps for the other ARMA models would give all of the required values for the
information criteria. To give just one more example, in the case of an ARMA(5,5), the following would
be typed in the ARMA specification window (Figure 61).50
50
For more information on how to specify ARMA and ARIMA models in Stata, refer to the respective entry in the
Stata manual.
75
Again, we need to generate the information criteria by selecting Specification, diagnostic, and
goodness-of-fit analysis. Table 2 reports values of the information criteria for all the competing
ARMA models, calculated via Stata.51
Table 2: Information Criteria for ARMA(p,q) Models
AIC
p/q 0 1 2 3 4 5
0 1001.2637 977.40202 935.50826 931.45446 930.29495 929.95052
1 958.79144 933.4199 925.64874 923.78884 924.49989 929.30722
2 922.46005 924.40804 926.2427 924.07266 925.97743 922.58878
3 924.40159 924.63688 926.35538 925.95741 925.4296 923.84556
4 926.26105 926.27666 925.35727 929.26543 914.85569 918.0929
5 928.24536 925.9181 929.4992 921.68207 916.10621 919.801
SBIC
p/q 0 1 2 3 4 5
0 1008.8375 988.76271 950.65585 950.38895 953.01633 956.4588
1 970.15214 948.56749 944.58323 946.51022 951.00817 959.6024
2 937.60764 943.34253 948.96408 950.58094 956.27261 956.67086
3 943.33607 947.35826 952.86366 956.25259 959.51168 961.71453
4 948.98243 952.78495 955.65245 963.34751 952.72467 959.74877
5 954.75364 956.21327 963.58128 959.55105 957.76208 965.24377
So which model actually minimises the two information criteria? In this case, the criteria choose different
models: AIC selects an ARMA(4,4), while SBIC selects the smaller ARMA(2,0) model. These chosen
models are highlighted in bold in the table. It will always be the case that SBIC selects a model that
is at least as small (i.e., with fewer or the same number of parameters) as AIC, because the former
criterion has a stricter penalty term. This means that SBIC penalises the incorporation of additional
51
Note that these results can be calculated quicker using a do-File, which is a small program. We will discuss do-Files
later in this guide.
76
terms more heavily. Many different models provide almost identical values of the information criteria,
suggesting that the chosen models do not provide particularly sharp characterisations of the data and
that a number of other specifications would fit the data almost as well.
77
12 Forecasting Using ARMA Models
Suppose that an AR(2) model selected for the house price percentage changes series was estimated using
observations February 1991–December 2015, leaving 27 remaining observations to construct forecasts
for and to test forecast accuracy (for the period January 2016–March 2018).
Let us first estimate the ARMA(2,0) model for the time period 1991m2 – 2015m12. The specification
window for estimating this model resembles Figure 62. We select 2 as the Autoregressive order (p)
and leave the other model parts as zero. As we only want to estimate the model over a subperiod of
the data, we next select the tab by/if/in (Figure 63). In the dialogue box If: (expression) we type
in month<=tm(2015m12).
Figure 63: Restricting the Sample to the Subperiod 1991m2 - 2015m12
Next, we click OK and the following regression output should appear in the Output window.
78
Now that we have fitted the model we can produce the forecasts for the period 2016m1 to 2018m3.
There are two methods available in Stata for constructing forecasts: dynamic and static. The option
Dynamic calculates multi-step forecasts starting from the first period in the forecast sample. Static
forecasts imply a sequence of one-step-ahead forecasts, rolling the sample forwards one observation after
each forecast.
Figure 64: Postestimation Selector to Generate Predictions Based on an ARMA Model
79
We start with generating static forecasts. These forecasts can be generated by opening the ‘Postesti-
mation Selector’ and choosing Predictions/Means from the differenced or undifferenced series,
mean squared errors, residuals, etc. (Figure 64).
In the ‘predict’ specification window, we are first asked to name the variable that will contain the
predictions (Figure 65, upper left panel). We choose to name the static forecasts dhpf stat. As we want
to create predicted/fitted values, we keep the default option under Produce which is Values for mean
equation. If we change to the Options tab now, the window should resemble that in Figure 65, upper
right panel. We see that the option One-step prediction is selected as default, so we do not need to
make any changes at this stage. We simply click OK and we should find the new series appearing in
our Variables window.
We create the dynamic forecasts in a similar way. First we open the ‘predict’ specification window
again, and name the series that should contain the dynamic forecasts dhpf dyn. Then we change to the
Options tab. Here we select the option Switch to dynamic predictions at time: and we specify
the time as tm(2016m1), i.e., the start of the forecast period. By clicking OK, we generate the series
of dynamic forecasts (Figure 65, bottom panel).
Figure 65: Generating Static and Dynamic Forecasts
To spot differences between the two forecasts and to compare them to the actual values of the changes
in house prices that were realised over this period, it is useful to create a graph of the three series. To
80
do so, we click on Graphics/Time-series graphs/Line plots. We click on Create. . . and select
the variable ‘dhp’. We can format this plot by clicking on Line properties. We want this series
to be plotted in blue so we select this colour from the drop-down box. We then return to the main
specification window and create another plot of the series ‘dhpf stat’. Let us format this series as Red
and Dash. Finally, we create a plot for ‘dhpf dyn’ for which we choose the format Green and Dash.
As we only want to observe the values for the forecast period, we change to the if/in tab and restrict
the observations to those beyond December 2015 by typing month>tm(2010m12) into the dialogue
box. If the graph is correctly specified, it should look like Figure 66.
Figure 66: Graph Comparing the Static and Dynamic Forecasts with the Actual Series
Let us have a closer look at the graph. For the dynamic forecasts, it is clearly evident that the forecasts
quickly converge upon the long-term unconditional mean value as the horizon increases. Of course, this
does not occur with the series of 1-step-ahead forecasts which seem to more closely resemble the actual
‘dhp’ series.
A robust forecasting exercise would of course employ a longer out-of-sample period than the two years
or so used here, would perhaps employ several competing models in parallel, and would also compare
the accuracy of the predictions by examining the forecast error measures, such as the square root of
the mean squared error (RMSE), the MAE, the MAPE, and Theil’s U-statistic. Unfortunately, there is
no built-in function in Stata to compute these statistics so they would need to be created manually by
generating new data series for each of the statistics.52
52
You can find the formulae to generate the forecast error statistics in Brooks (2019).
81
13 Estimating Exponential Smoothing Models
Stata allows us to estimate exponential smoothing models as well. To do so, we click on Statistics/Time
series/Smoothers/univariate forecasters and then select Single-exponential smoothing. As
you can see from the other options under Smoothers/univariate forecasters, there is a variety of
smoothing methods available, including single and double, or various methods to allow for seasonality
and trends in the data. However, since single-exponential smoothing is the only smoothing method
discussed in the textbook, we will focus on this.
Figure 67: Specifying an Exponential Smoothing Model
82
In the specification window that appears, we first have to name the new variable that will contain the
smoothed forecasts (Figure 67, upper panel). We type in dhpf smo as New Variable. Next, we
specify that the Expression to smooth is dhp. Our estimation period is 1991m1 - 2015m12 which
we define by changing to the if/in tab and Restrict observations to month<=tm(2015m12) as
shown in Figure 67, lower panel. This leaves 27 observations for out-of-sample forecasting. We return
to the main tab and specify the Periods for out-of-sample forecast: 27. Clicking OK will give the
results shown below.
The output includes the value of the estimated smoothing coefficient (0.2383 in this case), together with
the sum-of-squared residuals (RSS) for the in-sample estimation period and the root mean squared error
(RMSE) for the whole forecast. The final in-sample smoothed value will be the forecast for those 27
observations (which in this case would be 0.2501414). You can find these forecasts by changing to the
Data Editor view and scrolling down to the observations for 2016m1 - 2018m3.53
14 Simultaneous Equations Modelling

What is the relationship between inflation and stock returns? Clearly, they ought to be simultaneously
related given that the rate of inflation will affect the discount rate applied to cashflows and therefore
the value of equities, but the performance of the stock market may also affect consumer demand and
therefore inflation through its impact on householder wealth (perceived or actual).
This simple example uses the same macroeconomic data as used previously (‘macro.dta’) to es-
timate this relationship simultaneously. Suppose (without justification) that we wish to estimate the
following model, which does not allow for dynamic effects or partial adjustments and does not distinguish
between expected and unexpected inflation:
inflationt = α0 + α1 returnst + α2 dcreditt + α3 dprodt + α4 dmoney + u1t (7)
returnst = β0 + β1 dprodt + β2 dspreadt + β3 inflationt + β4 rtermt + u2t (8)
where ‘returns’ are stock returns – see Brooks (2019) for details.
It is evident that there is feedback between the two equations since the inflation variable appears in
the stock returns equation and vice versa. Two-stage least squares (2SLS) is therefore the appropriate
technique to use. To do this we need to specify a list of instruments, which would be all of the variables
from the reduced form equation. In this case, the reduced form equations would be:
inflation = f (constant, dprod, dspread, rterm, dcredit, rterm, dmoney) (9)
returns = g(constant, dprod, dspread, rterm, dcredit, rterm, dmoney) (10)
53
Note that these values are also dependent on the initial value of the smoothed series. By default Stata uses the mean
calculated over the first half of the sample. The upper panel of Figure 67 gives the option to set a specific initial value or
to use the mean over a selected number of observations.
83
For this example we will be using the ‘macro.dta’ file. We can access the 2SLS estimator by clicking on
Statistics/Endogenous covariates and selecting Linear regression with endogenous covariates.
In the specification window, we first need to define the Dependent variable: inflation. In the dialog
box to the right we input all exogenous variables, i.e., dprod dcredit dmoney thus omitting the
endogenous variable ‘rsandp’ from the list of regressors, as we type this variable in the Endogenous
variables dialogue box (Figure 68, left panel).
Figure 68: Specifying the 2SLS Model for the Inflation (left) and Returns (right) Equation
Finally, we are asked to define the list of Instrumental variables, which are dcredit dprod rterm
dspread dmoney, i.e., the list of variables from the reduced form equation. The default estimator
is already defined to be Two-stage least squares (2SLS) so we do not need to make any changes
here. Similarly, the dialog box for the ‘rsandp’ equation would be specified as in Figure 68, right panel.
Clicking OK generates the regression results. The output below shows the results form the inflation
equation first, followed by the results from the returns equation.
84
The results show that the stock index returns are a positive and significant determinant of inflation
(changes in the money supply negatively affect inflation), while inflation has a negative effect on the
stock market, albeit not significantly so.
It may also be of relevance to conduct a Hausman test for the endogeneity of the inflation and stock
return variables. To do this, we estimate the reduced form equations and save the residuals. To simplify
this step we directly type in the regression command in the Command window. Let us start with the
inflation regression:
regress inflation dprod dspread rterm dcredit dmoney
Now we create a series of fitted values using the predict command. We select Statistics/Postesti-
mation/Predictions/Predictions and their SEs, leverage statistics, distance statistics, etc..
In the ‘predict’ specification window, we call the fitted value series inflation fit and we make sure that
the first option Linear prediction (xb) is selected. By clicking OK the new series of fitted values
should appear in the Variables window. We create rsandp fit in a similar way. First we estimate the
reduced from equation
regress rsandp dprod dspread rterm dcredit dmoney
85
and then we generate the fitted values using the predict command. Finally, we estimate the structural
equations (separately), adding the fitted values from the relevant reduced form equations. The two
regression commands are as follows. For the inflation equation:
regress inflation dprod dcredit dmoney rsandp rsandp fit
and for the stock returns equation:
regress rsandp dprod dspread rterm inflation inflation fit
The results of these regressions are presented below.
The conclusion is that the inflation fitted value term is not significant in the stock return equation and
so inflation can be considered exogenous for stock returns. Thus it would be valid to simply estimate
this equation (minus the fitted value term) on its own using OLS. But the fitted stock return term is
significant in the inflation equation, suggesting that stock returns are endogenous.
86
15 The Generalised Method of Moments
Instead of the Two-Stage Least Squares Method, the instrumental variables approach can also be realised
using the Generalised Method of Moments (GMM). We therefore follow the same steps as in the previous
section, but in the specification windows (Figure 69) we choose the option Generalized method of
moments (GMM) for ‘Estimator’, but leaving all other options as before in Figure 68. Clicking OK
yields the results on the next page.
Figure 69: Specifying the Instrumental Variables Approach with GMM Estimator
Note that the results are qualitatively similar to those from the previous section, but show small differ-
ences. A look into the tab ‘GMM’ of the specification window in Figure 69 reveals that under default
settings the GMM estimator weighs the observations and hence influences the coefficient estimates.
This weighting matrix is optimal under the default setting of heteroscedastic error terms with the GMM
estimator. Therefore, the deviations from the previous section are only due to specific settings.
87
15.1 OLS as a Special Case of GMM
In the previous subsection we used the Generalised Method of Moments to estimate an instrumental
variables regression. However, we can also specify the moment conditions separately and customise the
GMM estimator. For example, we can also estimate the OLS regression from the CAPM model in Equa-
tion 1 with the Generalised Method of Moments estimator gmm. If we click Statistics/Endogenous
covariates/Generalised method of moments estimation, the window in the left panel of Figure 70
will pop up. By clicking Create. . . we can specify the moment equations necessary to estimate the
model. For the moment restrictions equivalent to the ordinary least squares method we hence want to
state that errors and explanatory variables are uncorrelated.
E(Xu) = 0 ⇔ E(X(y − β 0 X − α)) = 0 (11)
We achieve this by typing erford -- {b0} -- {b1}∗ ersandp into the window (Figure 70, right panel).
Using the curly brackets around the two coefficients b0 and b1, we also specify that two coefficients have
to be estimated. Further, we choose ersandp as the independent variable.
88
Figure 70: Estimating the CAPM Using the Generalised Method of Moments
As we do not plan to use instrumental variables in this example, we need to set the instrumental variables
equal to the independent variables that we want to use. Therefore, we switch to the Tab ‘Instruments’
(Figure 71, left panel) and click Create. . . to choose ersandp as our instrument (Figure 71, right
panel). Note that we do not need to specify the constant term as it is included automatically.
Figure 71: Estimating the CAPM Using the Generalised Method of Moments
After having specified our moment equation and the instrumental variables we can click OK and will
be presented with the output below.
89
Comparing the coefficients, we see that the GMM estimator finds the exact same solution. The differ-
ences in standard errors stem from the fact that the default setting uses robust standardqerrors, which we
193
could adjust for in the OLS regression, too. Further, the standard errors are scaled by 191
, accounting
for a small sample bias.
90
16 Vector Autoregressive (VAR) Models
In this section, a VAR is estimated in order to examine whether there are lead–lag relationships between
the returns to three exchange rates against the US dollar – the Euro, the British Pound and the Japanese
Yen. The data are daily and run from 14 December 1998 to 3 July 2018, giving a total of 7,142
observations. The data are contained in the Excel file ‘currencies.xls’. First, we import the dataset into
Stata and tsset Date. Next, we construct a set of continuously compounded percentage returns called
‘reur’, ‘rgbp’ and ‘rjpy’ using the following set of commands, respectively:
generate reur=100*(ln(EUR/L.EUR))
generate rgbp=100*(ln(GBP/L.GBP))
generate rjpy=100*(ln(JPY/L.JPY))
VAR estimation in Stata can be accomplished by clicking on Statistics/Multivariate time series

and then Vector autoregression (VAR). The VAR specification window appears as in Figure 72.
Figure 72: Specifying a VAR Model
We define the Dependent variables to be reur rgbp rjpy. Next we need to specify the number of
lags to be included for each of these variables. The default is two lags, i.e., the first lag and the second
lag. Let us keep the default setting for now and estimate this VAR(2) model by clicking OK. The
regression output appears as on the next page.
91
At the top of the table, we find information for the model as a whole, including information criteria,
while further down we find coefficient estimates and goodness-of-fit measures for each of the equations
92
separately. Each regression equation is separated by a horizontal line.
We will shortly discuss the interpretation of the output, but the example so far has assumed that we
know the appropriate lag length for the VAR. However, in practice, the first step in the construction of
any VAR model, once the variables that will enter the VAR have been decided, will be to determine the
appropriate lag length. This can be achieved in a variety of ways, but one of the easiest is to employ a
multivariate information criterion. In Stata, this can be done by clicking on Statistics/Multivariate
time series/VAR diagnostics and tests and selecting the first option Lag-order selection statis-
tics (preestimation). In the specification window we define the Dependent variables: reur rgbp
rjpy (Figure 73).
Figure 73: Selecting the VAR Lag Order Length
Then we are asked to specify the Maximum Lag order to entertain including in the model, and for this
example, we arbitrarily select 10. By clicking OK we should be able to observe the following output.
Stata presents the values of various information criteria and other methods for determining the lag
order. In this case, the Akaike (AIC) and Hannan–Quinn (HQIC) criteria select a lag length of four and
93
two as optimal, while Schwarz’s (SBIC) criterion chooses a VAR(1). Let us estimate a VAR(1) and
examine the results. Does the model look as if it fits the data well? Why or why not?
Next, we run a Granger causality test. We click Statistics/Multivariate time series/VAR
diagnostics and tests and select the first option Granger causality test. As we want to run the
Granger causality test on the most recently estimated VAR(1), we can simply press OK.
The results show only modest evidence of lead-lag interactions between the series. Since we have
estimated a tri-variate VAR, three panels are displayed, with one for each dependent variable in the
system. There is causality from EUR to GBP and from JPY to GBP that is significant at the 1% level.
We also find significant causality at the 5% level from EUR to JPY and GBP to JPY, but no causality
from any of the currencies to EUR. These results might be interpreted as suggesting that information is
incorporated slightly more quickly in the pound-dollar rate and yen-dollar rates than into the euro-dollar
rate.
After fitting a VAR, one hypothesis of interest is that all the variables at a given lag are jointly zero.
We can test this in Stata using a Wald lag-exclusion test. To do so, we select Statistics/Multivariate
time series/VAR diagnostics and tests/Wald lag-exclusion statistics and simply click OK. The
following statistics will appear for testing the null hypothesis that the coefficient estimates of the lagged
variables are jointly zero.
94
Stata obtains these test statistics for each of the three equations separately (first three panels) and for
all three equations jointly (last panel). Based on the high χ2 values for all four panels, we have strong
evidence that we can reject the null that no lags should be excluded.
To obtain the impulse responses for the estimated model, we click on Statistics/Multivariate
time series/Basic VAR. We are then presented with a specification window, as in Figure 74.
Figure 74: Generating Impulse Responses for the VAR(1) Model
95
We define the Dependent variables: reur rgbp rjpy and select a VAR model with one lag of each
variable. We can do this either by specifying Include lags 1 to: 1 or by Supply list of lags: 1. We
then specify that we want to generate a Graph for the IRFs, that is the impulse response functions.
Finally, we need to select the number of periods over which we want to generate the IRFs. We arbitrarily
select 20 and press OK. You can see that Stata re-estimates the VAR(1) but additionally it creates a
set of graphs of the implied IRFs (Figure 75).
Figure 75: Graphs of Impulse Response Functions (IRFs) for the VAR(1) Model
As one would expect given the parameter estimates and the Granger causality test results, only a
few linkages between the series are established here. The responses to the shocks are very small, except
for the response of a variable to its own shock, and they die down to almost nothing after the first lag.
Note that plots of the variance decompositions can also be generated using the varbasic command.
Instead of specifying the IRFs in the Graph selection, we choose FEVDs, that is the forecast-error
variance decompositions. A similar plot for the variance decompositions would appear as in Figure 76.
96
Figure 76: Graphs of FEVDs for the VAR(1) Model
There is little again that can be seen from these variance decomposition graphs apart from the fact that
the behaviour is observed to settle down to a steady state very quickly. To illustrate how to interpret
the FEVDs, let us have a look at the effect that a shock to the euro rates has on the other two rates
and itself, which are shown in the first row of the FEVD plot. Interestingly, while the percentage of the
errors that is attributable to own shocks is 100% in the case of the euro rate (top left graph), for the
pound, the euro series explains around 43% of the variation in returns (top middle graph), and for the
yen, the euro series explains around 7% of the variation.
Figure 77: Generating FEVDs for an Alternative Ordering
We should remember that the ordering of the variables has an effect on the impulse responses and
variance decompositions, and when, as in this case, theory does not suggest an obvious ordering of the
series, some sensitivity analysis should be undertaken. Let us assume we would like to test how sensitive
97
the FEVDs are to a different way of ordering. We first click on Statistics/Multivariate time series
and select IRF and FEVD analysis/Obtain IRFs, dynamic-multiplier functions, and FEVDs.
In the specification window that appears, we first need to Set active IRF file. . . which we do by
simply clicking on the respective button and then pressing OK (Figure 77). You can see that in the
folder where the current workfile is stored a new file appears named varbasic.irf which will store all the
new IRF results. However, you do not need to concern yourself with this file as Stata will automatically
obtain the necessary information from the files if needed. Next we name the new IRF as order2. To
make our results comparable, we choose 20 Forecast horizon. Finally, we need to select the order of
the variables. In this test, we choose the reverse order to that used previously, which is rjpy rgbp reur
and click OK to generate the IRFs.
Figure 78: Graphs for FEVDs with an Alternative Ordering
To inspect and compare the FEVDs for this ordering and the previous one, we can create graphs of the
FEVDs by selecting Statistics/Multivariate time series/IRF and FEVD analysis/Graphs by
98
impulse or response. A specification window as shown in Figure 78, upper panel, appears. We only
need to specify the Statistics to graph which is Cholesky forecast-error variance decomposition
(fevd) and click OK. We can now compare the FEVDs of the reverse order with those of the previous
ordering (Figure 78, lower panel). Note that the FEVDs for the original order are denoted by ‘varbasic’
and the ones for the reverse ordering by ‘order2’.
99
17 Testing for Unit Roots
In this section, we focus on how we can test whether a data series is stationary or not using Stata. This
example uses the same data on UK house prices as employed previously (‘ukhp.dta’). Assuming that
the data have been loaded, and the variables are defined as before, we want to conduct a unit root test
on the HP series. We click on Statistics/Time series/Tests and can select from a number of different
unit root tests. To start with, we choose the first option Augmented Dickey-Fuller unit-root test.
In the test specification window, we select Variable: hp and select 10 Lagged differences to be
included in the test (Figure 79).
Figure 79: Specifying an Augmented Dickey–Fuller Test for Unit Roots
We can also select whether we would like to show the regression results from the auxiliary regression
by checking the box Display regression table. We press OK and the following test statistics are
reported in the Output window on the next page.
In the upper part of the output we find the actual test statistics for the null hypothesis that the
series ‘hp’ has a unit root. Clearly, the test statistic (−0.402) is not more negative than the critical
value, so the null hypothesis of a unit root in the house price series cannot be rejected. The remainder
of the output presents the estimation results. Since one of the independent variables in this regression
is non-stationary, it is not appropriate to examine the coefficient standard errors or their t-ratios in the
test regression.
100
Now we repeat all of the above steps for the first difference of the house price series. To do so we
open the dfuller specification window again but instead of typing in HP in the Variable box we type
d.hp. The d. is a time-series operator that tells Stata to use first differences of the respective series
instead of levels. The output would appear as in the table below.
101
We find that the null hypothesis of a unit root can be rejected for the differenced house price series at
the 5% level.54
For completeness, we run a unit root test on the dhp series (levels, not differenced), which are the
percentage changes rather than the absolute differences in prices. We should find that these are also
stationary (at the 5% level for a lag length of 10, test statistic –3.14).
As mentioned above, Stata presents a large number of options for unit root tests. We could for
example include a trend term or a drift term in the ADF regression. Alternatively, we can use a
completely different test setting – for example, instead of the Dickey–Fuller test, we could run the
Phillips–Perron test for stationarity. Among the options available in Stata, we only focus on one further
unit root test that is strongly related to the Augmented Dickey–Fuller test presented above, namely
the Dickey-Fuller GLS test (dfgls). It can be accessed in Stata via Statistics/Time series/DF-GLS
test for a unit root. ‘dfgls’ performs a modified Dickey-Fuller t-test for a unit root in which the series
has been transformed by a generalised least-squares regression.
Several empirical studies have shown that this test has significantly greater power than the previous
versions of the augmented Dickey-Fuller test. Another advantage of the ‘dfgls’ test is that it does not
require knowledge of the optimal lag length before running it but it performs the test for a series of
models that include 1 to k lags.
54
If we decrease the number of added lags we find that the null hypothesis is rejected even at the 1% significance level.
102
Figure 80: Specifying the Dickey–Fuller GLS Test
In the specification window, shown in Figure 80, we select Variable: hp and specify the Highest lag
order for Dickey-Fuller GLS regressions to be 10. We then press OK and Stata generates the
following output.
We see a series of test-statistics for models with different lag lengths, from 10 lags to 1 lag. Below the
table we find information criteria in order to select the optimal lag length. The last two criteria, the
modified Schwartz criterion (Min SC) and the modified Akaike information criterion (Min MAIC), both
select an optimal lag length of 2.
103
18 Cointegration Tests and Modelling Cointegrated Systems
Reading: Brooks (2019, Sections 8.3–8.11)
In this section, we will examine the S&P500 spot and futures series contained in the ‘SandPhedge.dta’
workfile (that were discussed in section 3) for cointegration using Stata. We start with a test for
cointegration based on the Engle-Granger approach where the residuals of a regression of the spot price
on the futures price are examined. First, we create two new variables, for the log of the spot series
and the log of the futures series, and call them lspot and lfutures, respectively.55 Then we run the
following OLS regression:
regress lspot lfutures
Note that is is not valid to examine anything other than the coefficient values in this regression as the
two series are non-stationary. Let us have a look at both the fitted and the residual series over time. As
explained in previous sections, we can use the predict command to generate series of the fitted values
and the residuals. For brevity, only the commands to create these two series are presented here:56
predict lspot fit, xb

predict resid, residuals
Next we generate a graph of the actual, fitted and residual series by clicking on Graphics/Time-series
graphs/Line plots or simply typing in the command: twoway (tsline lspot, lcolor(blue)) (tsline
lspot fit, lcolor(green)) (tsline resid, yaxis(2) lcolor(red))
Figure 81: Actual, Fitted and Residual Plot

55
We use the commands gen lspot=ln(Spot) and gen lfutures=ln(Futures) to generate the two series. Note that
it is common to run a regression of the log of the spot price on the log of the futures rather than a regression in levels;
the main reason for using logarithms is that the differences of the logs are returns, whereas this is not true for the levels.
56
If you prefer to generate these series using the Stata menu you can select Statistics/Postestimation/Predic-
tions/Predictions and their SEs, leverage statistics, distance statistics, etc. and specify each series using the
specification window.
104
Note that we have created a second y-axis for their values as the residuals are very small and we would
not be able to observe their variation if they were plotted in the same scale as the actual and fitted
values.57 The plot should appear as in Figure 81.
You will see a plot of the levels of the residuals (red line), which looks much more like a stationary
series than the original spot series (the blue line corresponding to the actual values of y). Note how
close together the actual and fitted lines are – the two are virtually indistinguishable and hence the very
small right-hand scale for the residuals.
Let us now perform an ADF Test on the residual series ‘resid’. As we do not know the optimal lag
length for the test we use the DF-GLS test by clicking on Statistics/Time series/Tests/DF-GLS
test for a unit root and specifying a 12 lags as the Highest lag order for Dickey-Fuller GLS
regressions. The output should appear as below.
The three information criteria at the bottom of the test output all suggest at least 9 lags. Let us focus on
an optimal lag length of 9. For nine lags we have a test statistic of (−1.634) which is not more negative
than the critical values, even at the 10% level. Thus, the null hypothesis of a unit root in the test
regression residuals cannot be rejected and we would conclude that the two series are not cointegrated.
This means that the most appropriate form of the model to estimate would be one containing only first
differences of the variables as they have no long-run relationship.
If instead we had found the two series to be cointegrated, an error correction model (ECM) could
have been estimated, as there would be a linear combination of the spot and futures prices that would
be stationary. The ECM would be the appropriate model in that case rather than a model in pure first
difference form because it would enable us to capture the long-run relationship between the series as well
as their short-run association. We could estimate an error correction model by running the following
regression
regress rspot rfutures L.resid
The corresponding estimation output is presented below.

57
When using the menu to create the graph you can add the second axis by ticking the box Add a second y axis on
the right next to the Y variable box when defining the Plot for the residuals.
105
While the coefficient on the error correction term shows the expected negative sign, indicating that if
the difference between the logs of the spot and futures prices is positive in one period, the spot price
will fall during the next period to restore equilibrium, and vice versa, the size of the coefficient is not
really plausible as it would imply a large adjustment. Given that the two series are not cointegrated,
the results of the ECM need to be interpreted with caution and a model of the form
regress rspot rfutures L.rspot L.rfutures
would be more appropriate. Note that we can either include or exclude the lagged terms and either
form would be valid from the perspective that all of the elements in the equation are stationary.
Before moving on, we should note that this result is not an entirely stable one – for instance, if
we run the regression containing no lags (i.e., the pure Dickey–Fuller test) or on a subsample of the
data, we should find that the unit root null hypothesis should be rejected, indicating that the series are
cointegrated. We thus need to be careful about drawing a firm conclusion in this case.
18.1 The Johansen Test for Cointegration

Although the Engle–Granger approach is evidently very easy to use, as outlined above, one of its major
drawbacks is that it can estimate only up to one cointegrating relationship between the variables. In
the spot-futures example, there can be at most one cointegrating relationship since there are only two
variables in the system. But in other situations, if there are more variables, there can potentially be more
than one linearly independent cointegrating relationship. Thus, it is appropriate instead to examine the
issue of cointegration within the Johansen VAR framework.
The application we will now examine centres on whether the yields on Treasury bills of different
maturities are cointegrated. For this example we will use the ‘fred.dta’ workfile which we created in
section 9.58 It contains six interest rate series corresponding to 3 and 6 months, and 1, 3, 5, and 10
years.59 Each series has a name in the file starting with the letters ‘GS’. The first step in any cointegration
analysis is to ensure that the variables are all non-stationary in their levels form, so confirm that this
58
We use the provided variable daten to set the time-series by typing gen month=mofd(daten) and tsset month,
monthly into the Command window.
59
The vec intro entry in the Stata Manual provides a good overview of estimating VECM models in Stata. It illustrates
the process of testing for cointegration and estimating a VECM based on an example.
106
is the case for each of the six series, by running a unit root test on each one using the dfgls command
with a maximum lag length of 12.60
Before specifying the VECM using the Johansen method, it is often very useful to graph the variables
to see how they are behaving over time and with respect to each other. This will also help us to select
the correct option for the VECM specification, e.g., if the series appear to follow a linear trend. To
generate a graph of all variables we use the well-known time-series line plot:
twoway (tsline GS3M) (tsline GS6M) (tsline GS1) (tsline GS3) (tsline GS5) (tsline GS10)
and Figure 82 should appear. Note that we dropped the labels to make the legend easier readable. We
can do this by typing label variable GS3M "" for the GS3M series and others respectively.
Figure 82: Graph of the Six U.S. Treasury Interest Rates
We see that the series generally follow a linear downward trend, though some series show stronger inter-
temporal variation with large drops than other series. Additionally, while all series seem to be related
in some way, we find that the plots of some rates resemble each other more strictly than others, e.g.,
the GS3M, GS6M and GS1 rates.
To test for cointegration or fit cointegrating VECMs, we must also specify how many lags to include in
the model. To select the optimal number of lags we can use the methods implemented in Stata’s varsoc
command. To access this test, we click on Statistics/Multivariate time series/VEC diagnostics
and tests/Lag-order selection statistics (preestimation). However, as the models we are planning
to estimate are very large, we need to increase the maximum number of variables that Stata allows in a
model, the so-called matsize. The default matsize is 400, while the maximum matsize in Stata/MP and
Stata/SE is 11,000. We simply set matsize to its maximum number using the command: set matsize
11000
60
Note that for the 6-month, 5-year, and 10-year rates, the unit root test is rejected for the optimal lag length based on
the Schwarz criterion. However, for the sake of this example we will continue using all six rates.
107
Figure 83: Specifying the Lag-Order Selection Test
Once this is done, we can run the lag-order selection test. In the specification window for the test, we
first define all six interest rates as Dependent variables and then select a Maximum lag order
of 12 (Figure 83). We then click OK and the test output should appear as below.
The four information criteria provide conclusive results regarding the optimal lag length. All four criteria
FPE, AIC, HQIC, and SBIC suggest an optimal lag length of 2. Note, that this might not always be
the case, and it is then up to the reader to decide on the appropriate lag length. In the framework of
this example, we follow the information criteria and select a lag length of 2.
The next step of fitting a VECM is determining the number of cointegrating relationships using a
VEC rank test. The corresponding Stata command is vecrank. The tests for cointegration implemented
in ‘vecrank’ are based on Johansen’s method by comparing the log likelihood functions for a model
that contains the cointegrating equation(s) and a model that does not. If the log likelihood of the
unconstrained model that includes the cointegrating equations is significantly different from the log
108
likelihood of the constrained model that does not include the cointegrating equations, we reject the null
hypothesis of no cointegration.
Figure 84: Testing for the Number of Cointegrating Relationships
To access the VEC rank test, we click on Statistics/Multivariate time series and select Cointe-
grating rank of a VECM. In the specification window (Figure 84, left panel) we define the list of
Dependent variables: GS3M GS6M GS1 GS3 GS5 GS10. Next, we set the Maximum lag to
be included in underlying VAR model to 2 as determined in the previous step. We set the Trend
specification to rconstant, since we want to allow for the cointegration relationship to be stationary
around a constant mean, but we do not want linear time trends in the levels of the data.
Switching to the reporting tab (Figure 84, right panel) , we add the 1% critical values to our output
and click OK. The following table should appear in the Output window.
The first column in the table shows the rank of the VECM that is been tested, or in other words
the number of cointegrating relationships for the set of interest rates. The second and third columns
report the number of smoothing parameters and the log-likelihood values, respectively. In the fourth
column we find the ordered eigenvalues, from highest to lowest. We find the λtrace statistics in the fifth
column, together with the corresponding critical values for the 5% level and the 1% level in the sixth and
seventh column. The first row of the table tests the null hypothesis of no cointegrating vectors, against
109
the alternative hypothesis that the number of cointegrating equations is strictly larger than the number
assumed under the null hypothesis, i.e., larger than zero. The test statistic of 247.75 considerably
exceeds the critical value (111.01) and so the null of no cointegrating vector is rejected. If we then
move to the next row, the test statistic (154.28) again exceeds the critical value so that the null of at
most one cointegrating vector is also rejected. This continues, and we also reject the null of at most
two cointegrating vectors, but we stop at the next row, where we do not reject the null hypothesis of
at most three cointegrating vectors at the 1% level. If we use a significance level of 5%, we would still
reject this hypothesis and would only stop in the next row.
Besides the λtrace statistic, we can also employ an alternative statistic, the maximum-eigenvalue
statistic (λmax ). In contrast to the trace statistic, the maximum-eigenvalue statistic assumes a given
number of r cointegrating relations under the null hypothesis and tests this against the alternative that
there are r+1 cointegrating equations. We can generate the results for this alternative test by going back
to the ‘vecrank’ specification window, changing to the Reporting tab and checking the box Report
maximum-eigenvalue statistic. We leave everything else unchanged and click OK.
The test output should now report the results for the λtrace statistics in the first panel and those for
the λmax statistics in the panel below. We find that the results from the λmax test confirm our previous
results and show that we cannot reject the null hypothesis of three cointegrating relations against the
alternative of four cointegrating relations between the interest rates. It is therefore reasonable to assume
a cointegration rank of three.
Figure 85: Specifying the VECM
Now that we have determined the lag length, trend specification and the number of cointegrating rela-
tionships, we can fit the VECM model. To do so, we click on Statistics/Multivariate time series and
select Vector error-correction model (VECM). In the VECM specification window, we first specify
the six interest rates as the Dependent variables and then select 3 as the Number of cointegrating
equations (rank) and 2 again as the Maximum lag to be included in underlying VAR model
(Figure 85). As in the previous specification, we keep the default Trend specification: rconstant
as well as all other default specifications and simply press OK. The output should appear as on the
following pages.
110
111
112
Stata produces a large set of tables. The header of the table contains information about the sample, the
fit of each equation, and statistics regarding the overall model fit. The first table contains the estimates
of the short-run parameters, along with their standard errors, z-statistics, and confidence intervals. The
113
two coefficients on ‘L.ce1’, ‘L.ce2’ and ‘L.ce3’ are the parameters in the adjustment matrix α for this
model. The second table contains the estimated parameters of the cointegrating vector for this model,
along with their standard errors, z-statistics, and confidence intervals.
Figure 86: Defining Constraints
It is sometimes of interest to test hypotheses about either the parameters in the cointegrating vector or
their loadings in the VECM. Let us assume we would like to restrict the coefficients on the rates GS3M
and GS6M in the first cointegrating equation to be zero, implying that the two series do not appear in
the first cointegrating equation. To do this we return to the VECM specification window, and click on
New constraints. . . . A new window appears and we set the Constraint identifying number to
1 and Define expression or coefficient list: as [ ce1]GS3M = 0 which restricts the coefficient on
GS3M in the first cointegrating relationship to be zero (Figure 86). We then click OK.
Figure 87: VECM Specification with Constraints and One Cointegrating Equation
We do the same for the GS6M series by setting the Constraint identifying number to 2 and Define
expression or coefficient list: as[ ce1]GS6M = 0 and clicking OK. Further, we can normalise the
114
effect of the 1-year rate by setting [ ce1]GS1 = 1 as the third constraint. Once we have returned to the
main VECM specification window we tick the box Constraints to place on cointegrating vectors
and specify in the dialog box 1 2 3, which corresponds to the three constraints we have just defined.
For this example, we are only allowing for one cointegrating relationship. Thus, we change the
Number of cointegrating equations (rank) to 1 (Figure 87).
We are only interested in the estimates of the parameters in the cointegrating equations. We can
tell Stata to suppress the estimation table for the adjustment and short-run parameters by changing
to the Reporting tab and ticking the box Suppress reporting of adjustment and short-run
parameters. Once all of these specifications have been executed, we press OK and we should find the
VECM estimation output as in the table below.
There are two restrictions, so that the test statistic follows a χ2 distribution with two degrees of freedom.
In this case, the test statistic of 17.14 implies that we reject the restrictions at the 1% level. Thus, we
would conclude that the cointegrating relationship must also include the short end of the yield curve.
115
19 Volatility Modelling
19.1 Testing for ‘ARCH Effects’ in Exchange Rate Returns

In this section we will test for ‘ARCH effects’ in exchange rates using the ‘currrencies.dta’ dataset.
First, we want to compute the Engle (1982) test for ARCH effects to make sure that this class of models
is appropriate for the data. This exercise (and the remaining exercises of this section), will employ
returns on daily exchange rates where there are 7,141 observations. Models of this kind are inevitably
more data intensive than those based on simple linear regressions. Hence, everything else being equal,
they work better when the data are sampled daily rather than at a lower frequency.
Figure 88: Testing for ARCH Effects Using Engle’s Lagrange Multiplier Test
A test for the presence of ARCH in the residuals is calculated by regressing the squared residuals on a
constant and p lags, where p is set by the user. As an example, assume that p is set to five. The first
step is to estimate a linear model so that the residuals can be tested for ARCH. In Stata we perform
these tests by fitting a constant-only model based on an OLS regression and testing for ARCH effects
using Engle’s Lagrange multiplier test. To do so we use the command
regress rgbp
and then click on Statistics/Postestimation to open the ‘Postestimation Selector’ and select Spec-
ification, diagnostic, and goodness-of-fit analysis/Test for ARCH effects in the residuals
(Figure 88, left panel). In the specification window that appears we only need to Specify a list of lag
orders to be tested: as 5 and press OK (Figure 88, right panel).
116
As can be seen from the test output, the Engle test is based on the null hypothesis that there are
no ARCH effects against the alternative hypothesis that the data are characterised by (in our case)
ARCH(5) disturbances.
The test shows a p-value of 0.0000, which is well below 0.05, suggesting the presence of ARCH effects
in the pound-dollar returns.
19.2 Estimating GARCH Models

To estimate a GARCH-type model in Stata, we select Statistics/Time series/ARCH/GARCH/ARCH

and GARCH models. In the ARCH specification window that appears we define Dependent vari-
able: rjpy (Figure 89).
Figure 89: Specifying a GARCH(1,1) Model
We do not include any further independent variables but instead continue by specifying the Main
model specification. Let us first Specify maximum lags with respect to the ARCH and GARCH
terms. The default is to estimate the model with one ARCH and no GARCH. In our example we
want to include one ARCH and one GARCH term (i.e., one lag of the squared errors and one lag of
117
Figure 90: Optional Settings for a GARCH(1,1) Model
the conditional variance, respectively). Thus, we input 1 GARCH maximum lag. If we wanted to
include a list of non-consecutive lags, e.g., lag 1 and lag 3, we could do this by selecting Supply list of
lags and then specifying the specific lags we want to include for the ARCH and GARCH.
The ARCH specification window provides various options of how to vary the model (Figure 90). You
can have a look at the options by clicking through the various tabs. Model 2 can be used to include
ARCH-M terms (see later in this section), while Model 3 provides different options for the assumed
distribution of the errors, e.g., instead of assuming a Gaussian distribution we can specify a Student’s
t-distribution. In the final, tab we can specify the Maximization technique. Log-likelihood functions
for ARCH models are often not well behaved so that convergence may not be achieved with the default
estimation settings. It is possible in Stata to select the iterative algorithm (Newton–Raphson, BHHH,
BFGS, DFP), to change starting values, to increase the maximum number of iterations or to adjust the
convergence criteria. For example, if convergence is not achieved, or implausible parameter estimates are
obtained, it is sensible to re-do the estimation using a different set of starting values and/or a different
optimisation algorithm.
Estimating the GARCH(1,1) model for the yen-dollar (‘rjpy’) series using the instructions as listed
above, and the default settings elsewhere yields the results on the following page. The coefficients on
both the lagged squared residuals and lagged conditional variance terms in the conditional variance
equation (i.e., the third panel in the output subtitled ‘ARCH’) are highly statistically significant.
Also, as is typical of GARCH model estimates for financial asset returns data, the sum of the coeffi-
cients on the lagged squared error and lagged conditional variance is very close to unity (approximately
0.99). This implies that shocks to the conditional variance will be highly persistent. This can be seen
by considering the equations for forecasting future values of the conditional variance using a GARCH
model. A large sum of these coefficients will imply that a large positive or a large negative return will
lead future forecasts of the variance to be high for a protracted period.
The individual conditional variance coefficients are also as one would expect. The variance intercept
term cons in the ‘ARCH’ panel is very small, and the ‘ARCH’-parameter ‘L1.arch’ is around 0.037
while the coefficient on the lagged conditional variance ‘L1.garch’ is larger at 0.956.
118
Stata allows for a series of postestimation commands. The following list provides a brief overview of these
commands. Details can be obtained in the Stata User Manual under the entry [TS] arch postestimation:
estat AIC, BIC, VCE, and estimation sample summary
estimates cataloging estimation results
lincom point estimates, standard errors, testing, and inference for linear combinations of
coefficients
lrtest likelihood-ratio test
margins marginal means, predictive margins, marginal effects, and average marginal effects
marginsplot graph the results from margins (profile plots, interaction plots, etc.)
nlcom point estimates, standard errors, testing, and inference for nonlinear combinations
of coefficients
predict predictions, residuals, influence statistics, and other diagnostic measures
predictnl point estimates, standard errors, testing, and inference for generalized predictions
test Wald tests of simple and composite linear hypotheses
testnl Wald tests of nonlinear hypotheses
119
19.3 GJR and EGARCH Models
Since the GARCH model was developed, numerous extensions and variants have been proposed. In
this section we will estimate two of them in Stata, the GJR and EGARCH models. The GJR model
is a simple extension of the GARCH model with an additional term added to account for possible
asymmetries. The exponential GARCH (EGARCH) model extends the classical GARCH by correcting
the non-negativity constraint and by allowing for asymmetries in volatility.
We start by estimating the EGARCH model. We select Statistics/Time series/ARCH/GARCH.
We see that there are a number of variants on the standard ARCH and GARCH model available. From
the list we select Nelson’s EGARCH model. The arch specification window appears and we notice
that it closely resembles the arch specification window for the classical ARCH/GARCH model except
that in the Main model specification box we are now asked to provide the maximum number of lags
for the EARCH and EGARCH terms. To start with, we choose 1 EARCH and 1 EGARCH term
to resemble the previous classic GARCH model (Figure 91).
Figure 91: Estimating the EGARCH Model
After pressing OK, we should retrieve the output on the following page. Note that in the output we
have suppressed the display of the iterations.
Looking at the results, we find that all EARCH and EGARCH terms are statistically significant. The
EARCH terms represent the influence of news – lagged innovations – in the Nelson (1991) EGARCH
model. The first term ‘L1.earch’ captures the
υ
p t−1
2
σt−1
term and ‘L1.earch a’ captures the r

|υ | 2
p t−1 −
2
σt−1 π
term. The negative estimate on the ‘L1.earch’ term implies that negative shocks result in a lower
next period conditional variance than positive shocks of the same sign. The result for the EGARCH
asymmetry term is the opposite to what would have been expected in the case of the application of a
GARCH model to a set of stock returns. But, arguably, neither the leverage effect or volatility effect
120
explanations for asymmetries in the context of stocks applies here. For a positive return shock, the
results suggest more yen per dollar and therefore a strengthening dollar and a weakening yen. Thus,
the EGARCH results suggest that a strengthening dollar (weakening yen) leads to higher next period
volatility than when the yen strengthens by the same amount.
Let us now test a GJR model. For this we click on Statistics/Time series/ARCH/GARCH and
select GJR form of threshold ARCH model. In the GJR specification window that appears,
we specify 1 ARCH maximum lag, 1 TARCH maximum lag and 1 GARCH maximum lag
(Figure 92), and press OK to fit the model.
Figure 92: Estimating the GJR Model
121
The following GJR estimation output should appear. Note that the display of iterations is again sup-
pressed.
Similar to the EGARCH model, we find that all ARCH, TARCH and GARCH terms are statistically
2 2
significant. The ‘L1.tarch’ term captures the υt−1 It−1 term where It−1 = 1 if υt−1 < 0 and It−1 = 0
otherwise. We find a negative coefficient estimate on the ‘L1.tarch’ term, which again is not what we
would expect to find according to the leverage effect explanation if we were modelling stock return
volatilities.
19.4 GARCH-M Estimation

To estimate a GARCH-M model in Stata, we re-open the specification window for the standard GARCH
model (Statistics/Time series/ARCH/GARCH/ARCH and GARCH models). We keep the
specifications in the Model tab as they are, i.e., Dependent variable: rjpy and 1 ARCH maximum
lag and 1 GARCH maximum lag, and change to the Model 2 tab (Figure 93). Here we check the
box Include ARCH-in-mean term in the mean-equation specification, which will include the
contemporaneous conditional variance in the conditional mean-equation. To estimate this GARCH-M
model we simply press OK and the following output should appear.
122
Figure 93: Specifying a GARCH-M model
In this case, the estimated volatility parameter in the mean equation (sigma2 in the ARCHM panel)
has a negative sign but is not statistically significant. We would thus conclude that, for these currency
returns, there is no feedback from the conditional variance to the conditional mean.
123
19.5 Forecasting from GARCH Models
GARCH-type models can be used to forecast volatility. In this subsection, we will focus on generating
the conditional variance forecasts using Stata. Let us assume that we want to generate forecasts based
on the EGARCH model estimated earlier for the forecast period 03Aug2016 to 03Jul2018. The first
step is to re-estimate the EGARCH model for the subsample running until 02Aug2016. To estimate the
model we click on Statistics/Time series/ARCH/GARCH/Nelson’s EGARCH and we input
the same specifications as previously, i.e., Dependent variable: rjpy, 1 EARCH maximum lag, 1
EGARCH maximum lag (see Figure 91 above). However, now we only want to estimate the model
for a subperiod of the data so we change to the by/if/in tab and define the following time restriction
in the If: (expression) dialog box:
Date<=td(02Aug2016)
Then we press OK to fit the model. Next, we generate the conditional variance forecasts. We select
Predictions/Means from differenced or undifferenced series, conditional variances, residu-
als, etc. in the ‘Postestimation Selector’ and are now presented with the ‘predict’ specification window
(Figure 94).
Figure 94: Generating Static Forecasts of the Conditional Variance
There is a variety of predicted values we can produce, which are listed under the Produce: headline.
As we want to generate forecasts of the conditional variance we select the third option from the top,
which is Values for the conditional variance (Figure 95, left panel). As was the case for the
previous forecasting exercise, we can either create static (a series of rolling single-step-ahead) forecasts
or dynamic (multiple-step-ahead) forecasts. Let us start with the static forecasts. We change to the
Options tab and make sure that the option One-step prediction is selected. However, as this is the
default specification we do not need to make any changes. Finally we have to give the new series a
name. We return to the Main tab and specify New variable name: cvar rjpy stat. Then we press
OK.
124
Figure 95: Generating Dynamic Forecasts of the Conditional Variances
Next we generate the dynamic conditional variance forecasts. We re-open the ‘predict’ specification
window and change the name of the new variable to cvar rjpy dyn. We check that the Produce
option Values for the conditional variance is selected and change to the Options tab. We now
select Switch to dynamic predictions at time and enter the starting value td(03Aug2016) into
the dialog box, which represents the start of the forecast period (Figure 95, right panel). Once all the
changes have been made we click on OK and the new series should appear in the Variables window.
Finally we want to graphically examine the conditional variance forecasts. To generate a time-series
graph of the static and dynamic forecasts, we click on Graphics/Time series graphs/Line plots. We
create Plot 1 which contains the series cvar rjpy stat and Plot 2 comprising the series cvar rjpy dyn.
As we only want to see the values for the forecast period we change to the if/in tab and specify If:
Date>=td(06jul2011). By clicking OK, the following graph should appear (Figure 96).
Figure 96: Graph of the Static and Dynamic Forecasts of the Conditional Variance
125
What do we observe? For the dynamic forecasts (red line), the value of the conditional variance starts
from a historically high level at the end of the estimation period, relative to its unconditional average.
Therefore, the forecasts converge upon their long-term mean value from above as the forecast horizon
increases. Turning to the static forecasts (blue line), it is evident that the forecast period is characterised
by a relatively low variance compared to the spikes as seen at the end of the estimation period.
Note that while the forecasts are updated daily based on new information that feeds into the forecasts,
the parameter estimates themselves are not updated. Thus, towards the end of the sample, the forecasts
are based on estimates almost two years old. If we wanted to update the model estimates as we rolled
through the sample, we would need to write some code to do this within a loop – it would also run much
more slowly as we would be estimating a lot of GARCH models rather than one.
Predictions can be similarly produced for any member of the GARCH family that is estimable with
the software. For specifics of how to generate predictions after estimation of GARCH or ARCH models,
refer to the corresponding postestimation commands section in the Stata Manual.
19.6 Estimation of Multivariate GARCH Models

Multivariate GARCH models are in spirit very similar to their univariate counterparts, except that
the former also specify equations for how the covariances move over time and are therefore by their
nature inherently more complex to specify and estimate. To estimate a multivariate GARCH model in
Stata, we click on Statistics/Multivariate Time series and we select Multivariate GARCH. In
the ‘mgarch’ specification window, we are first asked to select the type of multivariate GARCH model
that we would like to estimate.
Figure 97: Specifying a Multivariate GARCH Model
Stata allows us to estimate four commonly used parametrisations: the diagonal vech model, the con-
stant conditional correlation model, the dynamic conditional correlation model, and the time-varying
126
conditional correlation model. We select the Constant conditional correlation (ccc) model for now
(Figure 97).61
Figure 98: Specifying the Estimation Equation for a Multivariate GARCH Model
Next, we need to specify the variance equation by clicking on Create. . . next to the Equations dialogue
box. A new window appears (Figure 98). We specify the three currency returns series in the Dependent
variables box. Additional exogenous variables can be incorporated into the variance equation but for
now we just leave the settings as they are and press OK to return to the main specification window.
Next, we define the maximum lags of the ARCH and GARCH terms. We select 1 ARCH maximum
lag and 1 GARCH maximum lag.
By default, Stata estimates the parameters of MGARCH models by maximum likelihood (ML)
assuming that the errors come from a multivariate normal distribution. However, Stata also allows us to
assume a multivariate Student’s t distribution for the error terms. However, we will keep the Gaussian
distribution for now. Alternatively, there are various other options to change the model specification,
e.g., defining constraints on the parameters, adjusting the standard errors or the maximisation procedure.
However, for now, we will keep the default settings. The complexity of this model means that it takes
longer to estimate than any of the univariate GARCH or other models examined previously. Thus, it
might make sense to suppress the Iterations log under the Maximization tab. In order to estimate
the model, we press OK. The model output should resemble the table on the following page (note that
the iteration log is not shown, command nolog).
The table is separated into different parts, organised by dependent variable. The header provides de-
tails on the estimation sample and reports a Wald test against the null hypothesis that all the coefficients
on the independent variables in the mean equations are zero, which in our case is only the constant. The
null hypothesis is not rejected even at the 10% level for any of the series. For each dependent variable,
we first find the estimates for the conditional mean equation, followed by the conditional variance esti-
mates in a separate panel. It is evident that the parameter estimates in the variance equations are all
both plausible and statistically significant. In the final panel, Stata reports results for the conditional
correlation parameters. For example, the conditional correlation between the standardized residuals for
‘reur’ and ‘rgbp’ is estimated to be 0.637.
61
The Diagonal VECH model (DVECH) does not converge and, thus, does not produce any estimates given the data
at hand and the specification that we want to estimate. Therefore, we use the Constant conditional correlation model in
the following application. However, a corresponding Diagonal VECH model would theoretically be estimated in the same
way and only the model type in the bottom left corner needs to be adjusted.
127
128
20 Modelling Seasonality in Financial Data
20.1 Dummy Variables for Seasonality
In this subsection, we will test for the existence of a January effect in the stock returns of Microsoft
using the ‘macro.dta’ workfile. In order to examine whether there is indeed a January effect in a
monthly time-series regression, a dummy variable is created that takes the value one only in the months
of January. To create the dummy JANDUM, it is easiest to first create a new variable that extracts
the month from the Date series. To do so, we type the following command into the Command window
and press Enter:
gen Month=month(dofm(Date))
where month() tells Stata to extract the month component from the ‘Date’ series and the ‘dofm()’ term
is needed as the ‘month()’ command can only be performed on date series that are coded as daily data.
If you inspect the new series in the Data Editor you will notice that the series Month contains a ‘1’ if
the month is January, a ‘2’ if the month is February, a ‘3’ if the month is March, etc. Now it is very
simple to create the ‘JANDUM’ dummy. We type in the command window the following expression:
gen JANDUM = (Month==1)
and we press Enter. The new variable ‘JANDUM’ contains the binary value of the logical expression
‘Month==1’, which is false (0) for all months except January for which it is true and hence 1.
We can now run the APT-style regression first used in Section 7 of this guide but this time including
the new ‘JANDUM’ dummy variable. The command for this regressions is as follows:
regress ermsoft ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney dspread rterm APR00DUM
DEC00DUM JANDUM
The results of this regression are presented below.
129
As can be seen, the coefficient on the January dummy is statistically significant at the 10% level, and
it has the expected positive sign. The coefficient value of 3.139, suggests that on average and holding
everything else equal, Microsoft stock returns are around 3.1% higher in January than the average for
other months of the year.
20.2 Estimating Markov Switching Models

In this subsection, we will be estimating a Markov switching model in Stata. The example that we will
consider in this subsection relates to the changes in house prices series used previously. So we re-open
ukhp.dta. Stata enables us to fit two types of Markov switching models: Markov switching dynamic
regression (MSDR) models, which allow a quick adjustment after the process changes state and Markov
switching autoregression (MSAR) models that allow a more gradual adjustment. In this example, we
will focus on the former case.
To open the specification window for Markov switching regressions, we select Statistics/Time
series/Markov-switching model. In the specification window we first select the Model. As we
want to test a Dynamic regression we just keep the default option. Next we are asked to select the
Dependent variable and we select dhp. We want to estimate a simple switching model with just a
varying intercept in each state. As Stata automatically includes the (state-dependent) intercept we do
not need to specify any further variables in the boxes for the ‘Nonswitch variables’ or the variables with
‘Switching coefficients’. However, if we wanted to include further variables that allow for either changing
or non-changing coefficient parameters across states we could do this using the respective dialogue boxes.
Let us move on to specifying the Number of states. The default is 2 states and, for now, we stick
with the default option. Finally, we also want the variance parameters to vary across states, so we check
the box Specify state-dependent variance parameters. Once all of these specifications are made,
the window should resemble Figure 99.
Figure 99: Specifying a Markov Switching Model
We click OK and the results should appear as in the following table. Examining the results, it is clear
130
that the model has successfully captured the features of the data. Two distinct regimes have been
identified: regime 1 with a negative mean return (corresponding to a price fall of 0.24% per month) and
a relatively high volatility, whereas regime 2 has a high average price increase of 0.78% per month and
a much lower standard deviation.
Figure 100: Generating a Table of Transition Probabilities
131
To see the transition probabilities matrix, we open the ‘Postestimation Selector’ (Statistics/Postestimation)
and then select Specification, diagnostic, and goodness-of-fit analysis/Table of transition
probabilities (Figure 100, left panel).
Clicking on Launch, the specification window as shown in Figure 100, right panel, appears and we
simply click OK to generate the following transition matrix. Looking at the results, it appears that the
regimes are fairly stable, with probabilities of around 97% of remaining in a given regime next period.
We can also estimate the duration of staying in each regime. To do so, we simply select the second
option in the ‘Postestimation Selector’ called Table of expected state durations. After launching
this test and clicking OK in the new specification window, we should find the following output displayed
in the Output window.
We find that the average duration of staying in regime 1 is 33 months and of staying in regime 2 is 59
months. Finally, we would like to predict the probabilities of being in each one of the regimes at any
given point in time. We have only two regimes, and thus the probability of being in regime 1 tells us the
probability of being in regime 2 at a given point in time, since the two probabilities must sum to one.
To generate the state probabilities, we select Linear predictions, state probabilities, residuals,
etc. in the ‘Postestimation Selector’ (Figure 101, left panel).
132
Figure 101: Generating Smoothed State Probabilities
In the ‘predict’ specification window we first name the new variable that should contain the probabilities
of being in state 1 (Figure 101, right panel). We choose New variable names or variable stub:
prdhp. Next we specify that Stata should Compute probabilities. Once all of this is specified, we
click OK and should find the new variable in the Variables window. To visually inspect the probabilities,
we can make a graph of them, i.e., we graph variable ‘prdhp’. To do so we click Graphics/Time-series
graphs/Line plots. We click on Create. . . and choose Y variable: prdhp. Then we click Accept
and OK and the graph as shown in Figure 102 should appear.
Figure 102: State Probabilities Graph
Examining how the graph moves over time, the probability of being in regime 1 was close to one until
the mid-1990s, corresponding to a period of low or negative house price growth. The behaviour then
changed and the probability of being in the low and negative growth state (regime 1) fell to zero and
the housing market enjoyed a period of good performance until around 2005 when the regimes became
less stable but tending increasingly towards regime 1. Since early 2013 it is again much more likely to
be in regime 2.
133
21 Panel Data Models
The estimation of panel models, with either fixed and random effects, is very easy with Stata; the harder
part is organising the data so that the software can recognise that you have a panel of data and can
apply the techniques accordingly. While there are several ways to construct a panel workfile in Stata,
the simplest way, which will be adopted in this example, is to use the following three stages:
1. Set up your data in an Excel sheet so that it fits a panel setting, i.e., construct a variable that
identifies the cross-sectional component (e.g., a company’s CUSIP as identifier for different com-
panies, a country code to distinguish between different countries, etc.), and a time variable and
stack the data for each company above each other. This is called the ‘long’ format.62
2. Import the data into Stata using the regular Import option.
3. Declare the dataset to be panel data using the xtset command.
The application to be considered here is that of a variant on an early test of the capital asset pricing
model due to Fama and MacBeth (1973). Their test involves a 2-step estimation procedure: first, the
betas are estimated in separate time-series regressions for each firm and, second, for each separate point
in time, a cross-sectional regression of the excess returns on the betas is conducted
Rit − Rf t = λ0 + λm βP i + ui (12)
where the dependent variable, Rit − Rf t , is the excess return of the stock i at time t and the independent
variable is the estimated beta for the portfolio (P ) that the stock has been allocated to. The betas of
the firms themselves are not used on the RHS, but rather, the betas of portfolios formed on the basis
of firm size. If the CAPM holds, then λ0 should not be significantly different from zero and λm should
approximate the (time average) equity market risk premium, Rm − Rf . Fama and MacBeth (1973)
proposed estimating this second stage (cross-sectional) regression separately for each time period, and
then taking the average of the parameter estimates to conduct hypothesis tests. However, one could
also achieve a similar objective using a panel approach. We will use an example in the spirit of Fama–
MacBeth comprising the annual returns and ‘second pass betas’ for 11 years on 2,500 UK firms.63
To test this model, we will use the ‘panelx.xls’ workfile. Let us first have a look at the data in
Excel. We see that missing values for the ‘beta’ and ‘return’ series are indicated by a ‘NA’. The Stata
symbol for missing data is ‘.’ (a dot) so that Stata will not recognise the ‘NA’ as indicating missing
data. Thus we will need to clean the dataset first in order for Stata to correctly process the data.
We start by importing the excel file into Stata. Remember to tick the Import first row as variable
names box. It is now helpful to use the codebook command to get a first idea of the data characteristics
of the variables we have imported. We can either type codebook directly into the command window or
we use the Menu by clicking Data/Describe data/Describe data contents (codebook). We just
click OK to generate the statistics for all variables in memory. The return and beta series have been
imported as strings instead of numeric values due to the ‘NA’ terms for missing values that Stata does
not recognise.
62
You can also change your dataset into a long format using the Stata command reshape. Refer to the corresponding
entry in the Stata manual for further details.
63
Source: computation by Keith Anderson and the author. There would be some significant limitations of this analysis
if it purported to be a piece of original research, but the range of freely available panel datasets is severely limited and
so hopefully it will suffice as an example of how to estimate panel models with Stata. No doubt readers, with access to
a wider range of data, will be able to think of much better applications. There are also several illustrative examples of
applications in panel settings in the Stata manual.
134
Figure 103: Transforming String Variables into Numeric Variables
So first we need to transform the string variables into numeric values. We click on Data/Create or
change data/Other variable-transformation commands and choose the option Convert vari-
ables from string to numeric. In the specification window that appears we first select the two
variable that we want to destring, i.e., ‘beta’ and ‘return’ (Figure 103). We are now given the option
to either create a new variable which contains the destringed variables by selecting the first option and
specifying a new variable name or we can replace the string variables with the newly created numeric
series by clicking on Convert specified variables to numeric (original strings will be lost). We
choose the latter. Finally, we want Stata to replace all ‘NA’ values with the Stata symbol for missing
values. This can be achieved by checking the box Convert nonnumeric strings to missing values.
We click OK. When re-running the codebook command we should find that the series ‘beta’ and
‘return’ are now numeric values and that all missing values are indicated by a dot.
Figure 104: Declaring a Dataset to be Panel Data
The next step is to declare the dataset to be panel data. This includes defining the time component and
135
the cross-sectional component of our data. This step is important for commands that we will be using
later in the analysis. We click on Statistics/Longitudinal/panel data/Setup and utilities and
select Declare dataset to be panel data. In the specification window we define Panel ID variable:
firm ident and check the box for Time variable which we define to be year (Figure 104). We can now
provide Stata with further information regarding the time unit of the time variable. We select Yearly
as our dataset comprises yearly data. Once this has been specified we click OK. We should then find
the following output in the output window.
Now our dataset is ready to be used for panel data analysis. You will find that Stata has many tools
specific for panel data if you click on Statistics/Longitudinal/panel data. For example, if you select
Setup and utilities Stata provides you with information about the structure of your panel, e.g., the
number of time periods and the number of panel entities. Additionally, selecting Summarize xt data
is the panel version of the regular command to create summary statistics of the data. If we select this
option and choose the variables ‘beta’ and ‘return’ for which the summary statistics should be generated
the following output should appear.
We find that besides the ‘overall’ versions of the test statistics (which are the ones that are reported
when using the standard ‘summarize’ command) two additional versions are reported, i.e., ‘between’
and ‘within’, which capture the cross-sectional and the time-series dimensions of the data, respectively.
For example, if we look at the ‘Std. Dev.’ column we see how much the series vary ‘overall’, how much
variation there is ‘between’ companies and how much variation there is for one company over time, i.e.,
‘within’ one company. This command is very useful to get a better understanding of the data structure
and the source of variation in the data.
However, our primary aim is to estimate the CAPM-style model in a panel setting. Let us first
estimate a simple pooled regression with neither fixed nor random effects. Note that in this specification
we are basically ignoring the panel structure of our data and assuming that there is no dependence across
observations (which is very unlikely for a panel dataset). We can use the standard ‘regress’ command
for simple OLS models. In particular we type the following regression command into the Command
window: regress return beta and press Enter to generate the estimates presented below.
136
We can see that neither the intercept nor the slope is statistically significant. The returns in this
regression are in proportion terms rather than percentages, so the slope estimate of 0.000454 corresponds
to a risk premium of 0.0454% per month, or around 0.5% per year, whereas the average excess return
across all firms in the sample is around 2.2% per year.
But this pooled regression assumes that the intercepts are the same for each firm and for each year.
This may be an inappropriate assumption. Thus, next we (separately) introduce fixed and random
effects to the model. To do so we click on Statistics/Longitudinal/panel data/Linear models
and select the option Linear regression (FE, RE, PA, BE). The linear regression command xtreg
is a very flexible instruction in Stata as it allows you to fit random-effects models using the between
regression estimator, fixed-effects models (using the within regression estimator), random-effects models
using the GLS estimator (producing a matrix-weighted average of the between and within results),
random-effects models using the Maximum-Likelihood estimator, and population-averaged models. Let
us start with a fixed effect model. The dependent and independent variables remain the same as in the
simple pooled regression so that the specification window should look like Figure 105.
Figure 105: Specifying a Fixed Effects Model
Note that Stata offers many options to customise the model, including different standard error adjust-
ments and weighting options. For now we will keep the default options. However, for future projects,
137
the correct adjustment of standard errors is often a major consideration at the model selection stage.
We press OK and the following regression output should appear.
We can see that the estimate on the beta parameter is negative and statistically significant here, while
the intercept is positive and statistically significant. We now estimate a random effects model. For
this, we simply select the option GLS random-effects in the xtreg specification window. We leave
all other specifications unchanged and press OK to generate the regression output.
The slope estimate is again of a different order of magnitude compared to both the pooled and the fixed
effects regressions. As the results for the fixed effects and random effects models are quite different,
138
it is of interest to determine which model is more suitable for our setting. To check this, we use the
Hausman test. The null hypothesis of the Hausman test is that the random effects (RE) estimator is
indeed an efficient (and consistent) estimator of the true parameters. If this is the case, there should be
no systematic difference between the RE and FE estimators and the RE estimator would be preferred
as the more efficient estimator. In contrast, if the null is rejected, the fixed effect estimator needs to be
applied.
To run the Hausman test we need to create two new variables containing the coefficient estimates
of the fixed effects and the random effects model, respectively.64 So let us first re-run the fixed effect
model using the command xtreg return beta, fe. Once this model has been fitted, we click on
Statistics/Postestimation/Manage estimation results/Store current estimates in memory.
In the specification window we are asked to name the estimates that we would like to store (Figure 106).
In this case, we name them fixed to later recognise them as belonging to the fixed effect estimator. We
repeat this procedure for the random effects model by first re-running the model (using the command
xtreg return beta, re) and storing the estimates under the name random.
Figure 106: Storing Estimates from the Fixed Effects Model
Now we can specify the Hausman test. We click on Statistics/Postestimation/Specification, di-

agnostic, and goodness-of-fit analysis and select Hausman specification test.
Figure 107: Specifying the Hausman test

64
We base this Hausman test on the procedure described in the Stata manual under the the entry ‘[R] hausman’.
139
In the specification window we are asked to specify the consistent estimation and the efficient estimation.
In our case the consistent estimates relate to the fixed effects model, i.e., Consistent estimation:
fixed, and the efficient estimates relate to the random effects estimator, i.e., Efficient est.: random
(Figure 107). We keep all other default settings and press OK. The output with the Hausman test
results should appear as below.
The χ2 value for the Hausman test is 6.46 with a corresponding p-value of 0.011. Thus, the null
hypothesis that the difference in the coefficients is not systematic is rejected at the 5% level, implying
that the random effects model is not appropriate and that the fixed effects specification is to be preferred.
21.1 Testing for Unit Roots and Cointegration in Panels

Stata provides a range of tests for unit roots within a panel structure. You can see the different options
by selecting Statistics/Longitudinal/panel data/Unit-root tests and clicking on the drop-down
menu for Tests in the specification window.65 For each of the unit roots tests we can find the null
and alternative hypotheses stated at the top of the test output. The Levin-Lin-Chu, Harris-Tzavalis,
Breitung, Im-Pesaran-Shin, and Fisher-type tests have as the null hypothesis that all the panels contain
a unit root. In comparison, the null hypothesis for the Hadri Lagrange multiplier (LM) test is that all
the panels are (trend) stationary. Options allow you to include panel-specific means (fixed effects) and
time trends in the model of the data-generating process.
For the panel unit root test we will use the six Treasury bill/bond yields from the ‘fred.dta’ workfile.
Before running any panel unit root or cointegration tests, it is useful to start by examining the results
of individual unit root tests on each series, so we run the Dickey–Fuller GLS unit root tests (dfgls) on
the levels of each yield series.66
You should find that for all series the test statistics are well below – 2.5 (using one lag) and thus the
unit root hypothesis can be rejected at the 10% level.
As we know from the discussion above, unit root tests have low power in the presence of small
samples, and so the panel unit root tests may provide different results. However, before performing a
panel unit root test we have to transform the dataset into a panel format. Therefore, we need to stack
65
Further details are provided in the root entry in the Stata manual.
66
A description of how to run Dickey–Fuller GLS unit root tests is explained in section 16 of this guide.
140
all series below one another in one single data series. We first need to rename the series by putting a
‘rate’ in front of the series name:
rename GS3M rateGS3M

rename GS6M rateGS6M
rename GS1 rateGS1
rename GS3 rateGS3
rename GS5 rateGS5
rename GS10 rateGS10
Next, we reshape the data from a long to a wide format. Instead of copying and pasting the individual
datasets we can use the Stata command ‘reshape’ to do this job for us. We click on Data/Create
or change data/Other variable-transformation commands/Convert data between wide and
long. In the window that appears (Figure 108), we first select the type of transformation, i.e., Long
format from wide.
Figure 108: Reshaping the Dataset into a Panel Format
We specify the ID variable(s): Date. Then, we define the Subobservation identifier as the new
Variable: maturity (which will become the panel id) containing the different maturities of the Treasury
bill series. We also check the box Allow the sub-observation identifier to include strings. Finally,
we specify the Base (stub) names of X ij variables: which in our case is the rate in front of the
renamed Treasury series of different maturities.67 Now the window should resemble Figure 108 and we
press OK.
We will find that the six individual treasury yield series have disappeared and there are now only
three series in the dataset: ‘Date’, ‘maturity’ and ‘rate’. We can have a look at the data using the
Data Editor. We will find that our dataset now resembles a typical panel dataset with the series of
yields for different maturities stacked below each other in the ‘rate’ variable, and ‘maturity’ serving as
67
For more details and illustrative examples of how to use the reshape command, refer to the corresponding entry in
the Stata manual.
141
the panel id. As Stata only allows numeric variables to be a panel id we need to transform the string
variable ‘maturity’ into a numeric version. For this, we can use the Stata command ‘encode’. We can
access this command by clicking on Data/Create or change data/Other variable-transformation
commands/Encode value labels from string variable. In the specification window (Figure 109),
we first need to tell Stata the Source-string variable which in our case is maturity. We want to
create a numeric version of this variable named maturity num. By clicking OK, the new variable is
created. When checking the data type of the variable, e.g., by using the ‘codebook’ command, we should
find that ‘maturity num’ is a numeric variable whereas ‘maturity’ is (still) a string variable.
Figure 109: Encoding the Panel Variable
Now that all the data preparation has been done, we can finally perform the panel unit root test on the
’rate’ series. We open the ‘xtunitroot’ specification window by selecting Statistics/Longitudinal/-
panel data/Unit-root tests. As mentioned above, there is a variety of unit root tests that we can
choose from (by clicking on the drop-down menu below Test) (Figure 110, left panel). For now, we
keep the default test Levin-Lin-Chu. However, please feel free to test the sensitivities of our results to
alternative test specifications. Next, we specify the Variable: rate as the variable on which we want
to perform the test.
142
Figure 110: Specifying a Panel Unit Root Test
As a final step, we click on Panel settings to specify the panel id and time id in our dataset. In the
window that appears (Figure 110, right panel), we define the Panel ID variable: maturity num
and the Time variable: Date and also tell Stata that our time variable is of Monthly frequency by
selecting the respective option. We click OK to return to the main specification window and press OK
again to perform the test. The test output of the Levin–Lin–Chu panel unit root test is presented below.
As described above, the Levin–Lin–Chu test is based on the null hypothesis that the panels contain
unit roots. It assumes a common p for the different panels. Looking at the test results, we find a test
statistic of –6.56 with a corresponding p-value of 0.0000. Thus the unit root null is strongly rejected.
We can now re-run the panel unit root test using another test specification. What do you find?
Do all tests arrive at the same solution regarding the stationarity or otherwise, of the rate series? In
all cases, the test statistics are well below the critical values, indicating that the series contain unit
roots. Thus the conclusion from the panel unit root tests are in line with the ones derived from the test
143
of the individual series. Some series contain a unit root and thus the panel unit root null hypothesis
cannot be rejected. Note, however, that the additional benefits from using a panel in our case might be
modest since the number of different panels (N = 6) is quite small, while the total number of time-series
observations (T = 437) is relatively large.
It is also possible to perform panel cointegration tests in Stata. However, these cointegration tests
do not come as a built-in Stata function but are in a user-written command, a so-called ado-file. One
command for performing panel cointegration tests has been written by Persyn and Westerlund (2008)
and is based on the four panel cointegration tests developed by Westerlund (2007). It is called xtwest.
Another panel cointegration test is available via the ado-file xtfisher and is based on the test developed
by Maddala and Wu (1999). Finally, you can perform the panel cointegration test xtpedroni developed
in Pedroni (1999) and Pedroni (2001). Independent of which command you intend to use, you can install
the ado-files by typing in findit followed by the name of the command, e.g., findit xtwest. You then
need to follow the link that corresponds to the chosen command and select click here to install. We
leave the implementation of the panel cointegration test for further studies.
144
22 Limited Dependent Variable Models
Estimating limited dependent variable models in Stata is very simple. The example that will be con-
sidered here concerns whether it is possible to determine the factors that affect the likelihood that a
student will fail his/her MSc. The data comprise a sample from the actual records of failure rates for
five years of MSc students at the ICMA Centre, University of Reading, contained in the spreadsheet
‘MSc fail.xls’. While the values in the spreadsheet are all genuine, only a sample of 100 students is
included for each of the five years who completed (or not as the case may be!) their degrees in the
years 2003 to 2007 inclusive. Therefore, the data should not be used to infer actual failure rates on
these programmes. The idea for this is taken from a study by Heslop and Varotto (2007) which seeks
to propose an approach to preventing systematic biases in admissions decisions.68
The objective here is to analyse the factors that affect the probability of failure of the MSc. The
dependent variable (‘fail’) is binary and takes the value 1 if that particular candidate failed at first
attempt in terms of his/her overall grade and 0 elsewhere. Therefore, a model that is suitable for
limited dependent variables is required, such as a logit or probit.
The other information in the spreadsheet that will be used includes the age of the student, a dummy
variable taking the value 1 if the student is female, a dummy variable taking the value 1 if the student
has work experience, a dummy variable taking the value 1 if the student’s first language is English, a
country code variable that takes values from 1 to 10, a dummy that takes the value 1 if the student
already has a postgraduate degree, a dummy variable that takes the value 1 if the student achieved
an A-grade at the undergraduate level (i.e., a first-class honours degree or equivalent), and a dummy
variable that takes the value 1 if the undergraduate grade was less than a B-grade (i.e., the student
received the equivalent of a lower second-class degree).69 The B-grade (or upper second-class degree)
is the omitted dummy variable and this will then become the reference point against which the other
grades are compared. The reason why these variables ought to be useful predictors of the probability of
failure should be fairly obvious and is therefore not discussed. To allow for differences in examination
rules and in average student quality across the five-year period, year dummies for 2004, 2005, 2006 and
2007 are created and thus the year 2003 dummy will be omitted from the regression model.
First, we import the dataset into Stata. To check that all series are correctly imported we can use
the Data Editor to visually examine the imported data and the codebook command to get information
on the characteristics of the dataset. All variables should be in the numeric format and overall there
should be 500 observations in the dataset for each series with no missing observations. Also make sure
to save the workfile in the ‘.dta’-format.
To begin with, suppose that we estimate a linear probability model of Fail on a constant, Age,
English, Female, Work experience, A-Grade, Below-B-Grade, PG-Grade and the year dummies. This
would be achieved simply by running a linear regression, using the command:
regress Fail Age English Female WorkExperience Agrade BelowBGrade PGDegree

Year2004 Year2005 Year2006 Year2007
The results would appear as below.

68
Note that since this example only uses a subset of their sample and variables in the analysis, the results presented
below may differ from theirs. Since the number of fails is relatively small, I deliberately retained as many fail observations
in the sample as possible, which will bias the estimated failure rate upwards relative to the true rate.
69
The exact identities of the countries involved are not revealed in order to avoid any embarrassment for students from
countries with high relative failure rates, except that Country 8 is the UK!
145
While this model has a number of very undesirable features as discussed in Brooks (2019), it would
nonetheless provide a useful benchmark with which to compare the more appropriate models estimated
below.
Next, we estimate a probit model and a logit model using the same dependent and independent
variables as above. We begin with the logit model by clicking on Statistics/Binary outcomes and
choosing Logistic regression. First, we need to specify the dependent variable (Fail) and independent
variables (Age English Female WorkExperience Agrade BelowBGrade PGDegree Year2004
Year2005 Year2006 Year2007) as shown in Figure 111.
Figure 111: Specifying a Logit Model
146
Next, we want to specify the standard error correction. To do so, we click on the SE/Robust tab and
select the Standard error type: Robust from the drop-down menu (Figure 112). This option will
ensure that the standard error estimates are robust to heteroscedasticity.
Figure 112: Specifying Standard Errors for a Logit Model
Using the other tabs you can also change the optimisation method and convergence criterion. However,
we do not need to make any changes from the default, but simply click OK. The output for the logit
regression should appear as below.
Next, we estimate the above model as a probit model. We click on Statistics/Binary outcomes but
147
now select the option Probit regression. We input the same model specifications as in the logit case
and again select robust standard errors. The output of the probit model is presented below.
As can be seen, for both models the pseudo-R2 values are quite small at just below 9%, although this
is often the case for limited dependent variable models.
Turning to the parameter estimates on the explanatory variables, we find that only the work ex-
perience and A-grade variables and two of the year dummies have parameters that are statistically
significant, and the Below B-grade dummy is almost significant at the 10% level in the probit specifica-
tion (although less so in the logit model). However, the proportion of fails in this sample is quite small
(13.4%),70 which makes it harder to fit a good model than if the proportion of passes and fails had been
more evenly balanced. Note that Stata offers a variety of goodness-of-fit and classification tests, such as
the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. You can access these tests by selecting Statistics/Binary
outcomes/Postestimation and then choosing the test that you would like to perform.
A further test on model adequacy is to produce a set of in-sample forecasts – in other words, to
construct the fitted values. To do so, we open the ‘Postestimation Selector’ and click on Prediction-
s/Probabilities, linear predictions and their SEs, etc..
In the ‘predict’ specification window that appears we define the name of the new variable that
contains the predicted values of ‘Fail’ as New variable name: Failf (Figure 113). It should contain
the Probability of a positive outcome, i.e., the candidate fails (Fail = 1), which is the default so we
do not need to make any changes. We click OK and the new series ‘Failf’ should appear in the Variables
window.
70
Note that you can retrieve the number of observations for which ‘Fail’ takes the value 1 by using the command count
if Fail==1.
148
Figure 113: Creating Fitted Values from the Failure Probit Regression
To visually inspect the fitted values, we want to plot them as a graph. However, since our dataset
does not contain a time variable that we can plot the ‘Failf’ series against, we create a new series that
contains the row number of the respective observation. We can do so by using the command generate
seqnum= n, which specifies that the new variable ‘seqnum’ should contain the row number which is
denoted by ‘ n’.
We can now create a plot of the fitted values by selecting Graphics/Twoway graph (scatter,
line, etc.). In the line plot specification window, we click on Create. . . and then select Basic plots:
Line as well as Y variable: Failf and X variable: seqnum. The resulting plot should resemble that
in Figure 114.
Figure 114: Graph of the Fitted Values from the Failure Probit Regression
The unconditional probability of failure for the sample of students we have is only 13.4% (i.e., only 67
out of 500 failed), so an observation should be classified as correctly fitted if either yi = 1 and ŷi > 0.134
149
or yi = 0 and ŷi < 0.134.
The easiest way to evaluate the model in Stata is to click Statistics/Binary outcomes/Postes-
timation/Classification statistics after logistic/logit/probit/ivprobit. In the specification win-
dow that appears, we select the option Report various summary stats. including the classifica-
tion table (classification) and keep the default Use estimation sample. We define the Positive
outcome threshold to be 0.134 (Figure 115). Then we click OK and the table should appear as
below.
Figure 115: Generating a Classification Table for the Probit Model
150
From the classification table we can identify that of the 67 students that failed, the model correctly
predicted 46 of them to fail (and it also incorrectly predicted that 21 would pass). Of the 433 students
who passed, the model incorrectly predicted 155 to fail and correctly predicted the remaining 278 to
pass. Overall, we could consider this a reasonable set of (in sample) predictions with 64.8% of the total
predictions correct, comprising 64.2% of the passes correctly predicted as passes and 68.66% of the fails
correctly predicted as fails.
It is important to note that we cannot interpret the parameter estimates in the usual way (see the
discussion in Brooks (2019)). In order to be able to do this, we need to calculate the marginal effects.
Figure 116: Generating Marginal Effects
Stata has an in-built command that allows to calculate marginal effects which can be accessed via Statis-
tics/Postestimation/Marginal analysis/Marginal means and marginal effects, fundamental
analyses (Figure 116, left panel). In the ‘margins’ specification window that appears (Figure 116,
right panel) we first need to specify the Covariate for which we want to compute marginal effects. As
we want to generate marginal effects for all of the explanatory variables we type all in the dialogue
box. Next we select the Analysis type: Marginal effect (derivative) of covariate on outcome.
Leaving all other options to their default options and pressing OK, Stata should generate the table of
marginal effects and corresponding statistics as shown on the following page.
151
We can repeat this exercise for the logit model using the same procedure as above. Note that we
need to re-run the logit model first and then calculate marginal effects in the same way as described for
the probit model. If done correctly, the table of marginal effects should resemble the following:
Looking at the results, we find that not only are the marginal effects for the probit and logit models quite
similar in value, they also closely resemble the coefficient estimates obtained from the linear probability
model estimated earlier in the section.
Now that we have calculated the marginal effects, these values can be intuitively interpreted in terms
152
of how the variables affect the probability of failure. For example, an age parameter value of around
0.0012 implies that an increase in the age of the student by one year would increase the probability of
failure by 0.12%, holding everything else equal, while a female student is around 3.5% less likely than
a male student with otherwise identical characteristics to fail. Having an A-grade (first class) in the
bachelors’ degree makes a candidate around 11% less likely to fail than an otherwise identical student
with a B-grade (upper second-class degree). Finally since the year 2003 dummy has been omitted from
the equations, this becomes the reference point. So students were more likely in 2004, 2006 and 2007,
but less likely in 2005, to fail the MSc than in 2003.
153
23 Simulation Methods
23.1 Deriving Critical Values for a Dickey–Fuller Test Using Simulation
In this and the following subsections we will use simulation techniques in order to model the behaviour
of financial series. In this first example, our aim is to develop a set of critical values for Dickey–Fuller
test regressions. Under the null hypothesis of a unit root, the test statistic does not follow a standard
distribution, and therefore a simulation would be required to obtain the relevant critical values. Ob-
viously, these critical values are well documented, but it is of interest to see how one could generate
them. A very similar approach could then potentially be adopted for situations where there has been
less research and where the results are relatively less well known.
The simulation would be conducted in the following four steps:
1. Construct the data generating process under the null hypothesis – that is, obtain a series for y
that follows a unit root process. This would be done by:
• Drawing a series of length T , the required number of observations, from a normal distribution.
This will be the error series, so that ut ∼ N (0, 1).
• Assuming a first value for y, i.e., a value for y at time t = 1.
• Constructing the series for y recursively, starting with y2 , y3 , and so on
y 2 = y 1 + u2
y 3 = y 2 + u3
..
.
yT = yT −1 + uT
2. Calculating the test statistic, τ .
3. Repeating steps 1 and 2 N times to obtain N replications of the experiment. A distribution of

values for τ will be obtained across the replications.
4. Ordering the set of N values of τ from the lowest to the highest. The relevant 5% critical value
will be the 5th percentile of this distribution.
Some Stata code for conducting such a simulation is given below. The simulation framework considers
a sample of 1,000 observations and Dickey–Fuller regressions with no constant or trend, a constant but
no trend, and a constant and a trend. 50,000 replications are used in each case, and the critical values
for a one-sided test at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels are determined. The code can be found pre-written
in a Stata do-file entitled ‘dickey fuller simulation.do’.
Stata programs are simply sets of instructions saved as plain text, so that they can be written from
within Stata, or using a word processor or text editor. There are two types of Stata programs, do-files
and ado-files. The latter are equivalent to user-written commands and once installed, can be used like
any other Stata command such as summarize or regress. The former (do-files) need to be opened
every time the user wants to run the set of commands and can be interactively adjusted. We will only
deal with do-files and leave the issue of programming ado-files for more advanced Stata users. To run a
do-file, we open the Do-File Editor using the respective symbol in the Stata menu. In the window that
154
appears we click on File/Open. . . and select the ‘dickey fuller simulation.do’. We should now be able
to see the set of Stata commands.
The different colours indicate different characteristics of the instructions. All expressions in blue
represent Stata commands (such as ‘summarize’ or ‘regress’) and information on the individual com-
mands can be obtained typing help followed by the respective command in the Command window.
Expressions in red that are expressed in double quotes mark strings and might refer to file names or
paths, value labels of variables or string values of variables. Variables in light blue are a form of
auxiliary variable and usually their value is substituted for a predefined content.71
Finally, text expressed in green represents comments made by the Stata user. Comments are not
part of the actual instructions but rather serve to explain and describe the Stata codes. There are
different ways to create comments in Stata, either by beginning the comment with ∗ or // or placing
the comment between /∗ and ∗ / delimiters.72
The following lines of code are taken from the do-file ‘dickey fuller simulation.do’ which creates
critical values for the Dickey–Fuller test. The discussion below explains the function of the command
line.
1 /* DERIVING CRITICAL VALUES FOR A DICKEY - FULLER TEST
2 USING MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS */
3 clear
4 tempname tstats
5 set seed 12345
6 postfile ‘ tstats ’ t_none t_const t_trend using " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \
results . dta " , replace
7 local T =1200
8 local N =50000
9 quietly {
10 forvalues i =1/ ‘N ’ {
11 drop _all
12 set obs ‘T ’
13 generate y =0 in 1
14 replace y = y [ _n -1]+ rnormal () in 2/ ‘T ’
15 generate dy =y - y [ _n -1] in 2/ ‘T ’
16 generate lagy = y [ _n -1]
17 generate t = _n -200 in 201/ ‘T ’
18 // Regression with lag and no constant
19 regress dy lagy , noconstant
20 scalar t_none = _b [ lagy ]/ _se [ lagy ]
21 // Regression with lag and constant
22 regress dy lagy
23 scalar t_const = _b [ lagy ]/ _se [ lagy ]
24 // Regression with lag , trend and constant
25 regress dy lagy t
26 scalar t_trend = _b [ lagy ]/ _se [ lagy ]
27 post ‘ tstats ’ ( t_none ) ( t_const ) ( t_trend )
28 }
29 }
30 postclose ‘ tstats ’
31 use " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ results . dta " , clear
32 describe
33 tabstat t_none t_const t_trend , statistics ( p1 p5 p10 ) columns ( statistics )
To run the program we can click on the two very right buttons in the symbol menu of the Do-file Editor.
We have two options: (a) Execute Selection quietly (run) which will run the code but without
71
Macros are commonly used in Stata programming and can be applied to a variety of contexts. For more information
on the characteristics of Macros and their use in Stata, refer to the respective entry in the Stata manual.
72
For more details on how to create comments in Stata, refer to the corresponding entry in the Stata manual.
155
showing the output in the Stata Output window, and (b) Execute (do) which will progressively report
the output of the code. The latter is especially useful for debugging programs or running short programs,
though it leads to a slower execution of the program than when running it in the quiet mode. We can
also choose to run only parts of the instructions instead of the entire set of commands by highlighting
the lines of commands that we would like to perform and then selecting either of the two execution
options.
The first two lines are a simple comment that explains the purpose and contents of the do-file.73 The
lines that follow contain the actual commands that perform the manipulations of the data. The first
couple of lines are mere preparation for the main simulation but are necessary to access the simulated
critical values later on. Line 3 removes data and value labels from the memory to make sure there
is no confusion with commands run before this program. Line 4 is an auxiliary command which tells
Stata to create a temporary variable called ‘tstats’ that will be used within the program but will be
automatically deleted once the program is finished (both successfully and forcefully).
Line 5 ‘set seed 12345’ sets the so-called random number seed. This is necessary to be able to
replicate the exact t-values created with this program on any other computer and for any other try.
While this explanation might not be very informative at this stage, the command serves to define the
starting value for draws from a standard normal distribution which are necessary in later stages to create
variables that follow a standard normal distribution.
In line 6, we tell Stata to create a file that contains the t-values that will be generated based on
the different regressions. Specifically, we tell Stata that this file of results will contain three variables
t none t const t trend. ‘t none’, ‘t const’ and ‘t trend’ will contain the t-values for three different
regression models resembling the different unit root specifications: (a) without a constant or trend,
(b) with a constant but no trend, and (c) with a constant and a trend, respectively. We also specify
the location and the name of the file where the results should be stored, namely "D:\Programming
Guide\Stata Guide\results.dta". When running the program on your own computer you will have
to adjust the location of the file according to your computer settings.
Lines 7 and 8 set up the conditions for the loop, i.e., the number of repetitions N that will be
performed and the number of observations T . Loops are always indicated by braces; the set of commands
over which the loop is performed is contained within the curly brackets ({ }). For example, in our
command the loops end in lines 21 and 22.
Before turning to the specific conditions of the loop, let us have a look at the set of commands that
we want to perform the loop over, i.e., the commands that generate the t-values for the Dickey–Fuller
regressions. They are stated in lines 9 to 29. Line 11 ‘drop all’ tells Stata that it should drop all
variables and data that it currently has in memory so that we start with a completely empty dataset. In
the next line (‘set obs ‘T”) we specify that we will create a new dataset that contains T observations,
which we predefined as 1200. Lines 13 to 17 are commands to generate the variables that will be used
in the regressions.
Line 13 ‘generate y=0 in 1’ creates a new variable y that takes the value 0 for the first observation
and contains missing values for all remaining observations. Line 14 specifies the remaining values for ‘y’
for observations 2 to 1,200, namely a random walk-series that follows a unit root process. Recall that a
random walk process is defined as the past value of the variable plus a standard normal error term. It
is very easy to construct such a series, the previous value of the ‘y1’ variable is referred to as ‘y[ n-1]’
and the standard normal variate is added using the Stata function ‘rnormal()’. Note that ‘ n’ is a
so-called system variable that can be referred to in each Stata dataset. It indicates the number of the
observation, e.g., ‘ n[1]’ refers to the first observation, ‘ n[2]’ to the second observation, etc. It can
actively be referred to in Stata commands to indicate a certain observation as in our case.
73
Adding comments to your do-files is a useful practice and proves to be particularly useful if you revisit analyses that
you have first carried out some time ago as they help you to understand the logic of the commands and steps.
156
In lines 15 and 16 we generate first differences and lagged values of ‘y1’, respectively. Note that when
generating random draws it sometimes takes a while before the constructed series have the properties
that they should, and therefore, when generating the regressions, we exclude the first 200 observations,
which is indicated by the term ‘in 201/‘T” in line 17. As Stata does not have a built-in trend that
can be added to its OLS regression command ‘regress’ we manually create a variable ‘t’ that follows a
linear trend. This is done in line 17. ‘t’ takes the value 1 for observations 201 and increases by a value
of 1 for all consecutive observations.
Lines 19–20, 22–23 and 25–26 contain the regression commands to generate the t-values. Line 19
contains the regression without constant (specified by the ‘, noconstant’ term) and trend. In particular,
the line contains a regression of the first difference of ‘y’ on the lagged value of ‘y’. Line 22 refers to the
DF regression with constant but without trend. And in line 25 the trend variable ‘t’ is added so that
the overall model contains both a constant and a linear trend as additional right-hand-side variables
(besides ‘lagy’). Lines 20, 23 and 26 generate the t-values corresponding to the particular models.
The command scalar indicates that a scalar value will be generated and the expression on the RHS
of the equals sign defines the value of the scalar. It is the formula for computing the t-value, namely
the coefficient estimate on ‘lagy’ (i.e., ‘ b[lagy]‘) divided by the standard error of the coefficient (i.e.,
‘ se[lagy]’). Line 27 tells Stata that the t-values ‘t none’, ‘t const’ and ‘t trend’ for the three models
should be posted to the ‘results.dta’ file (which we have created in line 6).
If we were to execute this set of commands one time, we would generate one t-value for each of the
models. However, our aim is to get a large number of t-statistics in order to have a distribution of
values. Thus, we need to repeat the set of commands for the desired number of repetitions. This is
done by the loop command forvalues in line 10. It states that the set of commands included in the
braces will be executed 50,000 times (‘i=1/50000’). Note that for each of these 50,000 repetitions a
new set of t-values will be generated and added to the ‘results.dta’ file so that the final version of the
file will contain three variables (‘t none’, ‘t const’, ‘t trend’) with 50,000 observations each. Finally, the
‘quietly’ in line 9 tells Stata not to produce the output for the 50,000 repetitions of the DF regressions
but execute the commands “quietly”. ‘postclose ‘tstats” in line 30 signals Stata that no further values
will be added to the ‘results.dta’ file.
In line 31, we tell Stata to open the file ‘results.dta’ containing the 50,000 observations of t-values.
The command ‘describe’ gives us information on the characteristics of the dataset and serves merely
as a check that the program has been implemented and executed successfully. Finally, line 33 provides
us with the critical values for the three different models as it generates the 1st, 5th and 10th percentile
for the three variables ‘t none’, ‘t const’, ‘t trend’.
To run this program, we click on the button ‘Execute (do)’ on the very right in the toolbar of the
Data Editor. Note that due to the total number of 50,000 repetitions running this command will take
some time.74
The critical values obtained by running the above program, which are virtually identical to those
found in the statistical tables in Brooks (2019), are presented in Table 3 (to two decimal places). This is
to be expected, for the use of 50,000 replications should ensure that an approximation to the asymptotic
behaviour is obtained. For example, the 5% critical value for a test regression with no constant or trend
and 500 observations is −1.93 in this simulation, and −1.95 in Fuller (1976).
74
By changing the value for N in line 8, you can see how the number of iteration effects the results.
157
Table 3: Simulated Critical Values for a Dickey–Fuller Test
1% 5% 10%
No constant, no trend (t none) −2.56 −1.93 −1.61
Constant, no trend (t const) −3.44 −2.87 −2.57
Constant and trend (t trend) −3.98 −3.42 −3.13
Although the Dickey–Fuller simulation was unnecessary in the sense that the critical values for the
resulting test statistics are already well known and documented, a very similar procedure could be
adopted for a variety of problems. For example, a similar approach could be used for constructing
critical values or for evaluating the performance of statistical tests in various situations.
23.2 Pricing Asian Options

In this subsection, we will apply Monte Carlo simulations to price Asian options. The steps involved
are:
1. Specify a data generating process for the underlying asset. A random walk with drift model is
usually assumed. Also specify the assumed size of the drift component and the assumed size of
the volatility parameter. Select a strike price K, and a time to maturity, T.
2. Draw a series of length T, the required number of observations for the life of the option, from a
normal distribution. This will be the error series, so that t ∼ N (0, 1).
3. Form a series of observations of length T on the underlying asset.
4. Observe the price of the underlying asset at maturity observation T. For a call option, if the value
of the underlying asset on maturity date Pt ≤ K, the option expires worthless for this replication.
If the value of the underlying asset on maturity date Pt > K, the option expires in the money, and
has a value on that date equal to PT − K, which should be discounted back to the present using
the risk-free rate.
5. Repeat steps 1 to 4 a total of N times, and take the average value of the option over N replications.
This average will be the price of the option.
A sample of Stata code for determining the value of an Asian option is given below. The example is
in the context of an arithmetic Asian option on the FTSE 100, and two simulations will be undertaken
with different strike prices (one that is out of the money forward and one that is in the money forward).
In each case, the life of the option is six months, with daily averaging commencing immediately, and
the option value is given for both calls and puts in terms of index options. The parameters are given as
follows, with dividend yield and risk-free rates expressed as percentages:
Simulation 1: Strike = 6500 Simulation 2: Strike = 5500
Spot FTSE = 6,289.70 Spot FTSE = 6,289.70
Future FTSE = 6,405.35 Future FTSE = 6,405.35
risk-free rate = 6.24 risk-free rate = 6.24
Dividend yield = 2.42 Dividend yield = 2.42
Implied Volatility = 26.52 Implied Volatility = 34.33
158
All experiments are based on 25,000 replications and their antithetic variates (total: 50,000 sets of
draws) to reduce Monte Carlo sampling error. Some sample code for pricing an Asian option for
normally distributed errors using Stata is given as follows:
1 /* PRICING AN ASIAN OPTION USING MONTE CARLO SIMULATIONS */
2 clear
3 tempname prices
4 set seed 123456
5 postfile ‘ prices ’ put_val call_val using " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \
asianoption . dta " , replace
6 local N =25000
7 quietly {
8 forvalues i =1/ ‘N ’ {
9 # delimit ; // Initialise variables
10 drop _all ; set obs 125; local obs = 125;
11 local K = 6500; local iv = 0.2652; // Simulation 1
12 // local K = 5500; local iv = 0.3433; // Simulation 2
13 local s0 = 6289.70; local fut = 6405.35;
14 local rf = 0.0624; local dy = 0.0242;
15 # delimit cr
16 local ttm = 0.5
17 local dt = ‘ ttm ’/ ‘ obs ’
18 local drift = ( ‘ rf ’ - ‘ dy ’ - ‘ iv ’ ^2/2) * ‘ dt ’
19 local vsqrdt = ‘ iv ’* ‘ dt ’ ^0.5
20 // Generate a random path for the spot price
21 generate rands = rnormal ()
22 generate spot = ‘ s0 ’* exp ( ‘ drift ’+ ‘ vsqrdt ’* rands ) in 1
23 replace spot = spot [ _n -1]* exp ( ‘ drift ’+ ‘ vsqrdt ’* rands ) in 2/ ‘ obs ’
24 // Compute and save call and put price w . r . t . path
25 summarize spot , meanonly
26 scalar av = r ( mean )
27 scalar call_val = max ( av - ‘K ’ ,0) * exp ( - ‘ rf ’* ‘ ttm ’)
28 scalar put_val = max ( ‘K ’ -av ,0) * exp ( - ‘ rf ’* ‘ ttm ’)
29 post ‘ prices ’ ( put_val ) ( call_val )
30 scalar drop av call_val put_val
31 // Reuse random number with opposite sign
32 replace rands = - rands
33 replace spot = ‘ s0 ’* exp ( ‘ drift ’+ ‘ vsqrdt ’* rands ) in 1
34 replace spot = spot [ _n -1]* exp ( ‘ drift ’+ ‘ vsqrdt ’* rands ) in 2/ ‘ obs ’
35 // Compute and save call and put price w . r . t . path
36 summarize spot , meanonly
37 scalar av = r ( mean )
38 scalar call_val = max ( av - ‘K ’ ,0) * exp ( - ‘ rf ’* ‘ ttm ’)
39 scalar put_val = max ( ‘K ’ -av ,0) * exp ( - ‘ rf ’* ‘ ttm ’)
40 post ‘ prices ’ ( put_val ) ( call_val )
41 }
42 }
43 postclose ‘ prices ’
44 use " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ asianoption . dta " , clear
45 describe
46 summarize call_val
47 summarize put_val
Many parts of the program above use identical instructions to those given for the DF critical value
simulation, and so annotation will now focus on the construction of the program and on previously
unseen commands. As with the do-file for the DF critical value simulation, you can open (and run)
the program to price Asian options by opening the Do-file Editor in Stata and selecting the do-file
‘option pricing simulation.do’. You should then be able to inspect the set of commands and identify
159
commands, comments and other operational variables based on the colouring system described in the
previous subsection.
In line 5 you can see that this program is going to create a new workfile ‘asianoption.dta’ that will
contain the 50,000 simulated values for the put options (put val) and the call options (call val). The
following lines define how these values are generated.
Line 6 indicates that we will be performing N=25,000 repetitions of the set of commands (i.e.,
simulations). However, we will still generate 50,000 values for the put and call options each by using
a ‘trick’, i.e., using the antithetic variates. This will be explained in more detail once we get to this
command. Overall, each simulation will be performed for a set of 125 observations (see line 10). The
following lines specify the parameters for the simulation of the path of the underlying asset: the time
to maturity (ttm), the implied volatility (iv), the risk-free rate (rf ), and dividend yield (dy). We used
the command #delimit ; to change the delimiter to a semicolon. This enables us to write several lines
into one to save space. In line 13, we change the delimiter back to carriage return.
The command ‘local’ in front of the terms tells Stata that it constructs these variables as sort of
operational or auxiliary variables that represent the predefined content. ‘local dt=‘ttm’/‘obs’’ in
line 17 splits the time to maturity (0.5 years) into 125 discrete time periods. Since daily averaging is
required, it is easiest to set ‘obs’ to 125 (the approximate number of trading days in half a year), so
that each time period ‘dt’ represents one day. The model assumes under a risk-neutral measure that
the underlying asset price follows a geometric Brownian motion, which is given by
dS = (rf − dy)Sdt + σdz, (13)
where dz is the increment of a Brownian motion. The discrete time approximation to this for a time
step of one can be written as
√

1 2
St = St−1 exp rf − dy − σ dt + σ dtut (14)
2
where ut is a white noise error process. The following lines define further characteristics of the options
such as the strike price (K=6500) and the initial price of the underlying asset at t = 0 (s0=6289.70).75
Lines 21 to 23 generate the path of the underlying asset. First, random N (0, 1) draws are made (line
21), which are then constructed into a series of future prices of the underlying asset for the next 125
observations. Once all 125 observations have been created, we summarize the mean value of this series
(i.e., the average price of the underlying over the lifetime of the option) which we capture in ‘scalar
av=r(mean)’ (lines 26).
Lines 27 and 28 construct the terminal payoffs for the call and the put options, respectively. For
the call, call val is set to the average underlying price less the strike price if the average is greater
than the strike (i.e., if the option expires in the money), and zero otherwise. Vice versa for the put.
The payoff at expiry is discounted back to the present based on the risk-free rate (using the expression
exp(-‘rf ’∗ ‘ttm’)). These two values, i.e., the present value of the call and put options, are then posted
to the new workfile (line 29).
The process then repeats using the antithetic variates, constructed using replace rands=-rands.
As can be seen, we simply replace the values in rands and update the spot price series based on the
antithetic variates. Again, we calculate present values of the call and put options for these alternative
paths of the underlying asset and send them to the new workfile. Note that this way we can double the
‘simulated’ values for the put and call options without having to draw further random variates.
This completes one cycle of the loop, which will then be repeated for further 24,999 times and overall
create 50,000 values for the call and put options each. Once the loop has finished, we can open the new
75
Note that the values given here correspond to Simulation 1. For the second simulation the values have to be altered
accordingly.
160
workfile ‘asianoption.dta’ which contains the 50,000 simulated values using the command in line 44.
We can also look at the results using the Data Editor, and we will see that the dataset contains two
arrays ‘call val’ and ‘put val’, which comprise 50,000 rows of the present value of the call and put
option for each simulated path. The last thing that we then need to do is calculate the option prices as
the averages over the 50,000 replications. This can be done by reporting summary statistics in lines 46
and 47. The following output should appear in the Output window.
For the specifics stated above, the call price is approximately 206.30 and the put price lies around 350.69.
Note that both call values and put values can be calculated easily from a given simulation, since the
most computationally expensive step is in deriving the path of simulated prices for the underlying asset.
In the following table, we compare the simulated call and put prices for different implied volatilities and
strike prices along with the values derived from an analytical approximation to the option price, derived
by Levy, and estimated using VBA code in Haug (1998), pp. 97–100.
Table 4: Simulated Asian Option Prices
Simulation 1: Strike = 6500, IV = 26.52% Simulation 2: Strike = 5500, IV = 34.33%

Call Price Call Price
Analytical Approximation 203.45 Analytical Approximation 888.55
Monte Carlo Normal 206.30 Monte Carlo Normal 887.95
Put Price Put Price

Analytical Approximation 348.70 Analytical Approximation 64.52
Monte Carlo Normal 350.69 Monte Carlo Normal 62.78
The main difference between the way that the simulation is conducted here and the method used for
Stata simulation of the Dickey–Fuller critical values is that here, the random numbers are generated by
opening a new series called ‘rands’ and filling it with the random number draws. The reason that this
must be done is so that the negatives of the elements of rands can later be taken to form the antithetic
variates. Then the call and put prices for each replication are discounted back to the present using the
risk-free rate, and outside of the replications loop, the options prices are the averages of these discounted
prices across the 50,000 replications.
In both cases, the simulated option prices are quite close to the analytical approximations, although
the Monte Carlo seems to overvalue the out-of-the-money call and to undervalue the out-of-the-money
put. Some of the errors in the simulated prices relative to the analytical approximation may result from
the use of a discrete-time averaging process using only 125 data points.
161
24 Value at Risk
24.1 Extreme Value Theory
In this section, we are interested in extreme and rare events such as stock price crashes. Therefore, we
will look into the left tail of the distribution of returns. We will use the dataset provided in ’sp500.xlsx’
which contains daily returns on the S&P500 index from January 1950 until July 2018. From the price
series we generate log returns by typing
generate ret = log(sp500) – log(sp500[ n-1])
This can be done without setting a time variable via tsset because ‘[ n-1] refers to the previous obser-
vation. To have a first glance at the data, we type:
summarize ret, detail
to obtain a more detailed summary statistics such as that below.
As we are interested in the lower tail, the first three numbers of the first column, the 1%, 5% and 10%
percentiles, are of interest. They tell us, assuming the historical distribution of returns, what is the
maximum loss to expect, if we exclude the most extreme 1,5 or 10% of the distribution. In finance, we
also call them Value at Risk (VaR), e.g., a 1%-VaR of –0.026 as in our case means that the maximum
loss for a day that we can expect equals 2.6%, based on the 99% largest returns. Since this estimate is
derived directly from the historical data, we will also refer to it as the historical VaR.
If we were to assume that the returns follow a normal distribution, we can compute the 1%–VaR
directly from the mean (µ) and standard deviation (σ). The α-percentile of a normal distribution is
then given as
α
V aRnormal = µ − Φ−1 (1 − α)σ (15)
Since the last command we ran was summarize, Stata stores the values and we can access them using
α
the function r(). Therefore we can compute the V aRnormal directly after the summary statistics by
typing
display r(mean) – invnormal(1-0.01)*r(sd),
162
which will display the 1%-VaR as below.
1%
We directly see that the value V aRnormal = −0.022 is smaller in absolute value than the one obtained
from the historical distribution. Hence, assuming a normal distribution would lead to the assumption
that the maximal loss to expect is only 2.2%.
24.2 The Hill Estimator for Extreme Value Distributions

In the next step, we want to look into the tail of the distribution to estimate the VaR and we will
implement the Hill estimator of the shape parameter ξ of an extreme value distribution. The necessary
code can be found in the file ‘EVT.do’ as presented below.
1 /* Hill estimator for the shape parameter of an extreme value distribution */
2 clear
3 import excel " D :\ Programming Guide \ data \ sp500 . xlsx " , sheet ( " sp500 " ) firstrow
4 generate ret = log ( sp500 [ _n ]) - log ( sp500 [ _n -1])
5 summarize ret
6 scalar alpha = 0.01 // percentile
7 scalar N = r ( N )
8 scalar U = -0.025 // threshold
9 generate y = - ret if ( ret < U )
10 summarize y
11 local N_U = r ( N )
12 sort y
13 tempname hill
14 postfile ‘ hill ’ xi var using " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ hill . dta " , replace
15 forvalues k =1/ ‘ N_U ’ {
16 replace s = log ( y ) - log ( y [ ‘ N_U ’ - ‘k ’ +1])
17 summarize s if _n > ‘ N_U ’ - ‘k ’
18 scalar xi = 1/( ‘k ’ -1) * r ( sum ) // Hill estimator
19 scalar var = -y [ ‘k ’ ]*( N * alpha / ‘ N_U ’) ^( - xi ) // VaR estimation
20 post ‘ hill ’ ( xi ) ( var )
21 }
22 postclose ‘ hill ’
In the first lines, we import the dataset, compute the returns and define the confidence level alpha
and the threshold U. In line 9, we generate the data series ỹ, which comprises the absolute value of all
returns below the threshold U . We also save the length of this dataset in the variable N U (line 11). For
the Hill estimation we need to sort ỹ, which we achieve in line 12.
As the Hill estimator is dependent on how many of the observations below the threshold are used
(k), we will create a list and estimate ξk for all possible values of k. The code for this procedure spans
from line 13 to 22, while it is specifically line 18 where we compute the Hill estimator as in Brooks
(2019):
k−1
ˆ 1 X
ξk = log(ỹ(i) ) − log(ỹ(k) ) (16)
k − 1 i=1
We compute Equation (16) in three steps. First, we calculate the log differences of ỹ to the k th biggest
value ỹ(k) and save it into the variable s (line 16). Second, we summarize this variable over those indices
163
that exceed NU − k (line 17). Finally, we compute the VaR following Brooks (2019):
−ξ̂k
Nα
VaRhill,k = ỹ(k) , (17)
NU
where we replace ỹ(k) with its negative value to switch the sign back (line 19).
Figure 117: Hill Plot for Value at Risk
If we open the new file ‘hill.dta’, we can plot the series of VaR estimates against the number of extreme
values k included. Looking at the Hill plot in Figure 117, we can see that the estimated VaR is much
higher in absolute value. Using all observations we obtain V aRhill = −0.032, which means that the
expected maximum is 3.2%.
24.3 VaR Estimation Using Bootstrapping

The following Stata code can be used to calculate the minimum capital risk requirement (MCRR) for a
ten-day holding period (the length that regulators require banks to employ) using daily S&P500 data,
which is found in the file ‘sp500.dta’. The code is presented on the following page followed by comments
on some of the key lines.
Again, annotation of the Stata code will concentrate on commands that have not been discussed
previously. The first lines of command, set up the dataset for the further analyses. As we will be
changing the dataset throughout the program, we type the command ‘preserve’ in line 13 which saves
the dataset in its current stage and guarantees that it will be restored to this stage once the program
has ended. Note that when starting your program with the command ‘preserve’ it even restores the
dataset to its initial state when the program is not executed entirely, e.g., due to a bug in the program
or due to pressing ‘break’.
1 /* Calculation of MCRR for a 10 - day horizon using bootstrapping */

2 clear
3 import excel " D :\ Programming Guide \ data \ sp500 . xlsx " , sheet ( " sp500 " ) firstrow
164
4 generate n = _n
5 tsset n
6 local T = _N // 17247
7 generate rt = log ( sp500 / L . sp500 )
8 arch rt in 2/ ‘T ’ , arch (1/1) garch (1/1) nolog
9 quietly {
10 predict h in 2/ ‘T ’ , variance
11 generate resid = rt - _b [ _cons ]
12 generate sres = resid / h ^0.5
13 preserve
14 set seed 12345
15 tempfile sp500_using bootstrapped
16 tempname mcrr
17 postfile ‘ mcrr ’ min max using " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ VaR . dta " , replace
18 forvalues i =1/100 {
19 save " ‘ sp500_using ’ " , replace
20 keep sres
21 rename sres sres_b
22 bsample in 2/ ‘T ’
23 save " ‘ bootstrapped ’ " , replace
24 use " ‘ sp500_using ’ " , clear
25 merge 1:1 _n using " ‘ bootstrapped ’ "
26 set obs 17257
27
28 scalar a0 = [ ARCH ] _b [ _cons ]
29 scalar a1 = [ ARCH ] _b [ L . arch ]
30 scalar b1 = [ ARCH ] _b [ L . garch ]
31
32 replace h = a0 + a1 * resid [ ‘T ’ ]^2+ b1 * h [ ‘T ’] in 17248
33 replace rt = _b [ _cons ]+ sqrt ( h ) * sres_b [1] in 17248
34 replace sp500 = sp500 [ ‘T ’ ]* exp ( rt ) in 17248
35
36 forvalues i =17249/17257 {
37 replace h = a0 +( a1 + b1 ) * h [ ‘i ’ -1] in ‘i ’
38 replace rt = _b [ _cons ]+ sqrt ( h ) * sres_b [ ‘i ’ - ‘T ’] in ‘i ’
39 replace sp500 = sp500 [ ‘i ’ -1]* exp ( rt ) in ‘i ’
40 }
41
42 summarize sp500 if _n > ‘T ’
43 post ‘ mcrr ’ ( r ( min ) ) ( r ( max ) )
44 drop in 17248/17257
45 drop sres_b _merge
46 }
47 postclose ‘ mcrr ’
48 use " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ VaR . dta " , clear
49 // Long and Short positions
50 generate l1 = log ( min /2815.6201)
51 summarize l1
52 scalar mcrrl =1 - exp (( -1.645* r ( sd ) ) + r ( mean ) )
53 generate s1 = log ( max /2815.6201)
54 summarize s1
55 scalar mcrrs = exp ((1.645* r ( sd ) ) + r ( mean ) ) -1
56 }
57 display mcrrl
58 display mcrrs
We also create a new variable ‘ n’ as a substitute for the missing time variable in the dataset and ‘tsset’
the data to this variable. This is necessary as some of the commands that we will use later only work
165
when ‘tsset’ is performed.
The command generate rt=log(sp500/L.sp500) in line 7 creates continuously compounded re-
turns which are the dependent variable in the GARCH(1,1) model, i.e., one ARCH and one GARCH
term, that is estimated in the following line. As we lose one data point when calculating returns we
only perform the estimation for observations 2 to T .
The mean equation of the model contains a constant only, which is automatically included by Stata,
so we only need to specify the dependent variable rt in the regression command. The following line
generates a series of the fitted conditional variances for the model which are stored in the series h.
The two lines generate resid=rt- b[ cons] and generate sres=resid/hˆ0.5 will construct a set of
standardised residuals.
Next, we set up a set of (temporary) files that we will use within the bootstrap loop to temporarily
store subsets of the data as well as to store our final estimates from the replication. In particular,
the command tempfile sp500 using bootstrapped in line 15 creates two auxiliary files that will be
automatically deleted after the program has ended and serve to temporarily store a subset of the data.
The postfile command should be well known from the previous simulation examples and sets up the
file ‘VaR.dta’ to store the results of the bootstrap loop.
Next follows the core of the program, which involves the bootstrap loop. The number of replications
has been defined as 10,000. What we want to achieve is to re-sample the series of standardised residuals
(‘sres’) by drawing randomly with replacement from the existing dataset. However, as only the ‘sres’
series should be re-sampled while all the other data series should remain in their current order, we
need to transfer the ‘sres’ data series to the temporary file ‘bootstrapped’, perform the re-sampling and
re-import the re-sampled series into the full dataset. This is achieved by the set of commands in lines
19 to 25. Note that the command bsample is the command performing the actual bootstrapping while
the other results are merely auxiliary commands to store and merge the bootstrapped dataset. In order
to distinguish the bootstrapped standardised residuals from the original series, we rename the series to
‘sres b’ before merging it with the full dataset.
The next block of commands constructs the future path of the S&P500 return and price series as well
as the conditional variance over the ten-day holding period. The first step to achieve this is to extend
the sample period to include 10 further observations, i.e., observations 17248 to 17257. Unfortunately,
Stata does not allow us to simply extend some of the series to these new observations so we need to
manually tell Stata which values to input in the new cells. As these series are all recursively constructed
we start with the one-step ahead forecasts (observation 17248) in line 32 to 34 and then assign the values
for the other observations in a loop.
The one-step-ahead forecast of the conditional variance (See Brooks (2019), Chapter 9) is
hf1,T = α0 + α1 u2T + βhT ,
where hT is the conditional variance at time T , i.e., the end of the in-sample period, and uT is the
squared disturbance term at time T , and α0 , α1 and β are the coefficient estimates obtained from
the GARCH(1,1) model estimated over the observations 2 to T and the s-step-ahead forecast can be
produced by iterating
hfs,T = α0 + (α1 + β)hfs−1,T s ≥ 2.
First we create a set of scalars that contain the estimated coefficients (a0, a1 and b1). Then,
we generate the one-step-ahead forecast of h according to the formula above and place the value in
observation 17248 of the series ‘h’. Using this we can write the one-step ahead forecast of the return
as b[ cons] + sqrt(h)*sres b[1]. With the forecasted return we can also determine the new price as
the previous price compounded with the forecasted return in line 34.
166
Once we have determined the one-step ahead forecasts, the next steps are obtained recursively.
Therefore we use the loop in line 36 to 40 and consecutively update the variance, return and price
series.76
Finally, we obtain the minimum and maximum values of the S&P500 series over the ten days and
post them into the ‘mcrr’ file.
This set of commands is then repeated 10,000 times so that after the final repetition there will be
10,000 minimum and maximum values for the S&P500 prices in ‘VaR.dta’.
The final block of commands generates the MCRR for a long and a short position in the S&P500.
The first step is to construct the log returns for the maximum loss over the ten-day holding period,
which for the long position is achieved by the command generate l1=log(min/2815.6201) and
for the short position by generate s1=log(max/2815.6201). We now want to find the 5th per-
centile of the empirical distribution of the maximum losses for the long and short positions. Under
the assumption that the ‘l1’ and ‘s1’ statistics are normally distributed across the replications, the
MCRR can be calculated by the commands scalar mcrrl=1-exp((-1.645∗ r(sd))+r(mean)) and
scalar mcrrs=exp((1.645∗ r(sd))+r(mean))-1, respectively. The results generated by running the
above program should be displayed in the Stata Output window and should approximate to:
mcrrl = 0.03071088 for the long position, and
mcrrs = 0.03638716 for the short position.
These figures represent the MCRR for a long and short position, respectively, as a percentage of
the initial value of the position for 95% coverage over a 10-day horizon. This means that, for example,
approximately 3.1% of the value of a long position held as liquid capital will be sufficient to cover losses
on 95% of days if the position is held for 10 days. The required capital to cover 95% of losses over
a 10-day holding period for a short position in the S&P500 index would be around 3.6%. This is as
one would expect since the index had a positive drift over the sample period. Therefore, the index
returns are not symmetric about zero as positive returns are slightly more likely than negative returns.
Higher capital requirements are thus necessary for a short position since a loss is more likely than for a
long position of the same magnitude.
76
Note that the order of the commands is important as the new assigned conditional variance h in line 37 is used in line
38 to update the return series, which then is used to update the index level in line 39.
167
25 The Fama–MacBeth Procedure
In this section we will perform the two-stage procedure developed by Fama and MacBeth (1973). The
Fama–MacBeth procedure as well as related asset pricing tests are described Chapter 14 of Brooks
(2019). There is nothing particularly complex about the two-stage procedure – it only involves two
sets of standard linear regressions. The hard part is really in collecting and organising the data. If we
wished to do a more sophisticated study – for example, using a bootstrapping procedure or using the
Shanken (1992) correction. This would require more analysis then is conducted in the illustration below.
However, hopefully the Stata code and the explanations will be sufficient to demonstrate how to apply
the procedures to any set of data.
The example employed here is taken from the study by Gregory et al. (2013) that examines the
performance of several different variants of the Fama–French and Carhart models using the Fama–
MacBeth methodology in the UK following several earlier studies showing that these approaches appear
to work far less well for the UK than the US. The data required are provided by Gregory et al. (2013)
on their web site.77 Note that their data have been refined and further cleaned since their paper was
written (i.e., the web site data are not identical to those used in the paper) and as a result the parameter
estimates presented here deviate slightly from theirs. However, given that the motivation for this exercise
is to demonstrate how the Fama–MacBeth approach can be used in Stata, this difference should not be
consequential. The two data files used are ‘monthlyfactors.dta’ and ‘vw sizebm 25groups.dta’.
The former file includes the time-series of returns on all of the factors (smb, hml, umd, rmrf, the return
on the market portfolio (rm) and the return on the risk-free asset (rf)), while the latter includes the
time-series of returns on 25 value-weighted portfolios formed from a large universe of stocks, two-way
sorted according to their sizes and book-to-market ratios.
The first step in this analysis for conducting the Fama–French or Carhart procedures using the
methodology developed by Fama and MacBeth (1973) is to create a new Stata workfile which we call
‘ff data.dta’ and import the two .dta files into it. The data in both cases run from October 1980
to December 2017, making a total of 447 data points. However, in order to obtain results as close as
possible to those of the original paper, when running the regressions, the period is from October 1980 to
December 2010 (363 data points). We then need to set up a do-file (fama french.do) along the lines
of those set up in the previous subsections to conduct the two-stage procedure. The code is provided
on the next page.
Before starting with the actual two-stage Fama–MacBeth procedure we save a snapshot of the current
state of the workfile (‘snapshot save’, line 4). This is useful as we will be performing transformations
of the data in the file that are irreversible (once performed). If a snapshot of the file is saved than
we can always return to the file at the state at which the snapshot was saved, undoing all the data
manipulations that were undertaken in the meantime.
We can think of the remainder of this program as comprising several sections. The first step is to
transform all of the raw portfolio returns into excess returns which are required to compute the betas
in the first stage of Fama–MacBeth (lines 5 to 7). This is fairly simple to do and we just write over the
original series with their excess return counterparts. The command ’local obs=363’ in line 9 ensures
that the same sample period as the paper by Gregory et al. (2013) is employed throughout.
Next, we run the first stage of the Fama–MacBeth procedure, i.e., we run a set of time-series regres-
sions to estimate the betas. We want to run the Carhart (1997) 4-factor model separately for each of
the twenty-five portfolios. A Carhart 4-factor model regresses a portfolio return on the excess market
return (‘rmrf ’), the size factor (‘smb’), the value factor (‘hml’) and the momentum factor (‘umd’).
77
http://business-school.exeter.ac.uk/research/centres/xfi/famafrench/files/
168
1 /* The Fama - MacBeth two stage procedure */
2 clear
3 use " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ stata_files \ ff_data . dta "
4 snapshot save
5 foreach var of varlist S * M * B * {
6 replace ‘ var ’= ‘ var ’ - rf // Transform actual returns into excess returns
7 }
8 // FIRST STAGE TIME - SERIES REGRESSIONS / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
9 local obs =363 // set to 447 for whole dataset
10 tempname betas
11 postfile ‘ betas ’ beta_c beta_rmrf beta_umd beta_hml beta_smb using " D :\ Programming
Guide \ Stata Guide \ betas . dta " , replace
12 foreach y of varlist S * M * B * {
13 regress ‘y ’ rmrf umd hml smb if month >= tm (1980 m10 ) & month <= tm (2010 m12 )
14 scalar beta_c = _b [ _cons ]
15 scalar beta_rmrf = _b [ rmrf ]
16 scalar beta_umd = _b [ umd ]
17 scalar beta_hml = _b [ hml ]
18 scalar beta_smb = _b [ smb ]
19 post ‘ betas ’ ( beta_c ) ( beta_rmrf ) ( beta_umd ) ( beta_hml ) ( beta_smb )
20 }
21 postclose ‘ betas ’
22 drop smb hml umd rf rm rmrf
23 xpose , clear varname // Transpose data to cross sectional
24 drop in 1
25 merge 1:1 _n using " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ betas . dta "
26 // SECOND STAGE CROSS - SECTIONAL REGRESSIONS / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
27 local obs =363 // set to 447 for whole dataset
28 tempname lambdas
29 postfile ‘ lambdas ’ lambda_c lambda_rmrf lambda_umd lambda_hml lambda_smb rsquared
using " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ lambdas . dta " , replace
30 forvalues i =1(1) ‘ obs ’ {
31 regress v ‘i ’ beta_rmrf beta_umd beta_hml beta_smb
32 scalar lambda_c = _b [ _cons ]
33 scalar lambda_rmrf = _b [ beta_rmrf ]
34 scalar lambda_umd = _b [ beta_umd ]
35 scalar lambda_hml = _b [ beta_hml ]
36 scalar lambda_smb = _b [ beta_smb ]
37 scalar rsquared = e ( r2 )
38 post ‘ lambdas ’ ( lambda_c ) ( lambda_rmrf ) ( lambda_umd ) ( lambda_hml ) ( lambda_smb ) (
rsquared )
39 }
40 postclose ‘ lambdas ’
41 snapshot restore 1
42 use " D :\ Programming Guide \ Stata Guide \ lambdas . dta " , clear
43 local obs =363
44 foreach var of varlist lambda * { // Calculate lambda estimates and t - ratios
45 summarize ‘ var ’
46 scalar ‘ var ’ _mean = r ( mean )
47 scalar ‘ var ’ _tratio = sqrt ( ‘ obs ’) * r ( mean ) / r ( sd )
48 }
49 summarize rsquared
50 display lambda_c_mean lambda_c_tratio
51 display lambda_rmrf_mean la mb da _rm rf _t ra ti o
52 display lambda_smb_mean l ambda_ smb_tr atio
53 display lambda_hml_mean l ambda_ hml_tr atio
54 display lambda_umd_mean l ambda_ umd_tr atio
169
Since the independent variables remain the same across the set of regressions and we only change the
dependent variable, i.e., the excess return of one of the 25 portfolios, we can set this first stage up as
a loop. Lines 12 to 20 specify this loop. In particular, the lines of command specify that for each of
the variables listed behind the term ‘varlist’, Stata should perform an OLS regression of the portfolio’s
excess return (indicated by the ‘y’ which is to be replaced by the particular portfolio return listed in
the loop) on the four factors. Since the portfolio return variables all start with S, M or B, we can write
S* M* B* to tell Stata to use all variables that start with these letters. Note that we restrict the
sample for this model to the period October 1980 to December 2012 (if month>=tm(1980m10) &
month<=tm(2010m12)) instead of using the whole sample.
We need to store the estimates from these regressions into separate series for each parameter. This
is achieved by the commands in lines 10 and 11 as well as lines 19 and 21. In particular, the command
‘postfile’ sets up a new file named ‘betas.dta’ in which the beta coefficients on the four factors plus the
constant are saved. Thus, for each of the twenty-five portfolios we will generate four beta estimates that
will then be posted to the file ‘betas.dta’. After the loop has ended, the file ‘betas.dta’ will contain
25 observations for the 6 variables ‘beta c’, ‘beta rmrf ’, ‘beta umd’, ‘beta hml’ and ‘beta smb’.
To illustrate this further, the loop starts off with the excess return on portfolio ‘SL’ (the first item that
starts with S) and the coefficient estimates from the 4-factor model (‘beta c’ ‘beta rmrf ’ ‘beta umd’
‘beta hml’ ‘beta smb’) will be transferred to the ‘betas.dta’ file as the first entry for each variable.
Then Stata moves on to the second variable in the ‘varlist’, i.e., the excess return on portfolio
‘S2’, and will perform the 4-factor model and save the coefficient estimates in ‘betas.dta’. They will
constitute the second entry in the beta series. Stata will continue with this procedure until it has
performed the set of commands for the last variable that start with B, i.e., ‘BH’. The beta coefficients
for the regressions using ‘BH’ as the dependent variable will be the 25th entry in the file ‘betas.dta’.
Having run the first step of the Fama–MacBeth methodology, we have estimated the betas, also
known as the factor exposures. The slope parameter estimates for the regression of a given portfolio
(i.e., ‘beta rmrf ’, ‘beta umd’, ‘beta hml’, ‘beta smb’) will show how sensitive the returns on
that portfolio are to the corresponding factors and the intercepts (‘betas c’) will be the Jensen’s alpha
estimates.
These intercept estimates stored in ‘beta c’ should be comparable to those in the second panel of
Table 6 in Gregory et al. (2013) – their column headed ‘Simple 4F ’. Since the parameter estimates in all
of their tables are expressed as percentages, we need to multiply all of the figures given from the Stata
output by 100 for them to have the same scale.
If the 4-factor model is a good one, we should find that all of these alphas are statistically insignifi-
cant. We could test this individually, if we wished, by adding an additional line of code in the loop to
save the t-ratio in the regressions.78 . However, we avoid this here, since we will be working with the β
estimates only.
The second stage of the Fama–MacBeth procedure is to run a separate cross-sectional regression for
each point in time. An easy way to do this is to, effectively, rearrange or transpose the data so that
each column represents one month and the rows are the excess returns of one of the 25 portfolios. In
Stata this can be easily achieved by the command xpose, clear (line 23). ‘xpose’ transposes the data,
changing variables into observations and observations into variables. The supplement ‘varname’ adds
the variable ‘ varname’ to the transposed data containing the original variable names. The command
‘xpose’ deletes untransposed data so that after the execution the dataset cannot be returned to its
previous stage. To prevent our original data from getting lost, we saved the state of the data prior to
any transformations. For the second stage, we will not be using the time-series factors and variables
78
An appropriate command would be scalar beta c tratio= b[ cons]/ se[ cons]. Note that you would also need to
create the variable as part of the file and store it afterwards.
170
‘smb’, ‘hml’, ‘umd’, ‘rf ’, ‘rm’ and ‘rmrf ’ so we drop these from the dataset prior to transposing the
data (line 22). Then we transpose the data in line 23. Note that Stata has allocated new variable names
to the observations, which are constructed as ‘v’ plus the position of the observation in the previous
dataset. For example, all data points in the first row (of the previous dataset) corresponding to October
1980 are now stored in ‘v1’; all data points in the second row corresponding to November 1980 are
now stored in ‘v2’; and so on. The first row of the transposed dataset contains the months (though
in numeric coding). We drop this observation to make each row correspond to one of the 25 portfolios
(line 24). Thus, the first column contains the excess returns of all 25 portfolios for October 1980 and
the last column contains the excess returns of the 25 portfolios for December 2017.
Finally, we merge the transformed dataset with the betas estimated at the first stage of Fama–
MacBeth (line 25), which basically involves adding these variables to the existing dataset. This is neces-
sary as these variables will serve as the independent variables in the second stage of Fama–MacBeth. We
are now in a position to run the second-stage cross-sectional regressions corresponding to the following
equation.
R̄i = α + λM βi,M + λS βi,S + λV βi,V + λU βi,U + ei (18)

This is performed in lines 30 to 39. Again, it is more efficient to run this set of regressions in a
loop. In particular, we regress each of the variables (i.e., ‘v1’, ‘v2’, ‘v3’,. . . ,‘v363’) representing the
excess returns of the 25 portfolios for a particular month on the beta estimates from the first stage
(i.e., ‘beta rmrf ’, ‘beta umd’, ‘beta hml’ and ‘beta smb’). Then we store the coefficients on
these factor exposures in the scalars ‘lambda c’, ‘lambda rmrf ’, ‘lambda umd’, ‘lambda hml’
and ‘lambda smb’.
‘lambda c’ will contain all intercepts from the second stage regressions, ‘lambda rmrf ’ will contain
all parameter estimates on the market risk premium betas, and so on. We also collect the R2 values for
each regression in the scalar ‘rsquared’ as it is of interest to examine the cross-sectional average. We
store these lambdas in the file ‘lambdas.dta’.
Note that the command ‘forvalues i=1(1)‘obs” in line 30 indicates that we restrict the sam-
ple to December 2010 to make it comparable to Gregory et al. (2013). Thus, the first regression
will be of ‘v1’ corresponding to October 1980 on a constant, beta rmrf, beta umd, beta hml and
beta smb with the estimates being stored in the first row of the variables ‘lambda c’, ‘lambda rmrf ’,
‘lambda umd’, ‘lambda hml’, ‘lambda smb’ and ‘rsquared’ in the file ‘lambdas.dta’. The sec-
ond regression will be of ‘v2’ corresponding to November 1980 on the set of betas and the estimates will
be stored in the second row in ‘lambdas.dta’. This will go on until ‘v363’ corresponding to December
2010 and the lambda estimates for this regression will be reported in row 363 of ‘lambdas.dta’. Finally,
we restore the dataset to its initial state with the command ‘snapshot restore 1’ (line 43). The estimates
saved in the files ‘betas.dta’ and ‘lambdas.dta’ will not become lost when executing this command.
The final stage of the Fama–MacBeth procedure is to compute the averages, standard deviations and
t-ratios from the series of estimates from the second stage. For every factor j we compute the time-series
averages and standard deviations of the estimates λ̂j,t as follows:
v
T T
√ λ̂j
u
1 X u1 X
λ̂j = λ̂j,t , σ̂j = t (λ̂j,t − λ̂j )2 and tλj = T (19)
T t=1 T t=1 σ̂j
To do this we first ‘summarize’ each of the variables and then create a scalar containing the mean of
the variable (‘scalar ‘var’ mean=r(mean)’) and a scalar containing the t-ratio of the estimate (‘scalar
‘var’ tratio=sqrt(‘obs’)∗ r(mean)/r(sd)’). Thus ‘lambda c mean’ will contain the mean of the
171
cross-sectional intercept estimates, and the corresponding t-ratio will be stored in ‘lambda c tratio’
and so on. Note that we loop this step in order to preserve space.
Finally, we tell Stata to display these values (lines 50 to 54) in order to inspect the results of the
Fama–MacBeth procedure. The lambda parameter estimates should be comparable with the results in
the columns headed ‘Simple 4F Single’ from Panel A of Table 9 in Gregory et al. (2013). Note that they
use γ to denote the parameters which have been called λ in this text. The parameter estimates obtained
from this simulation and their corresponding t-ratio are given in the table below. Note that the latter
do not use the Shanken (1992) correction as Gregory et al. (2013) do. These parameter estimates are
the prices of risk for each of the factors, and interestingly only the price of risk for value is significantly
different from zero.
Table 5: Fama–MacBeth Market Prices of Risk
Parameter Estimate t-ratio

λC 0.50 1.33
λRM RF 0.07 0.15
λSM B 0.09 0.51
λHM L 0.39 2.08
λU M D 0.41 0.78
Mean R2
172
References
Brooks, C. (2019). Introductory Econometrics for Finance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK, 4th edition.
Carhart, M. M. (1997). On persistence in mutual fund performance. Journal of Finance, 52(1):57–82.
Durbin, J. and Watson, G. S. (1951). Testing for serial correlation in least squares regression. ii.
Biometrika, 38(1/2):159–177.
Engle, R. F. (1982). Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of the variance of

united kingdom inflation. Econometrica, 50(4):987–1007.
Fama, E. F. and MacBeth, J. D. (1973). Risk, return, and equilibrium: Empirical tests. Journal of
Political Economy, 81(3):607–636.
Fuller, W. A. (1976). Introduction to Statistical Time Series, volume 428. John Wiley and Sons.
Gregory, A., Tharyan, R., and Christidis, A. (2013). Constructing and testing alternative versions of
the fama–french and carhart models in the uk. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting, 40(1-
2):172–214.
Haug, E. G. (1998). The Complete Guide to Option Pricing Formulas. McGraw-Hill New York.
Heslop, S. and Varotto, S. (2007). Admissions of international graduate students: Art or science? a
business school experience. ICMA Centre Discussion Papers in Finance, 8.
Maddala, G. S. and Wu, S. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new
simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics, 61(S1):631–652.
Nelson, D. B. (1991). Conditional heteroskedasticity in asset returns: A new approach. Econometrica,

59(2):347–370.
Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regres-
sors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61:653–670.
Pedroni, P. (2001). Purchasing power parity tests in cointegrated panels. Review of Economics and
Statistics, 83(4):727–731.
Persyn, D. and Westerlund, J. (2008). Error-correction-based cointegration tests for panel data. Stata
Journal, 8(2):232–241.
Shanken, J. (1992). On the estimation of beta-pricing models. Review of Financial Studies, 5(1):1–33.
Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and
Statistics, 69(6):709–748.
173

SSRN Id3466904

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSRN Id3466904

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSRN Id3466904

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LISA SCHOPOHL

STATA GUIDE TO ACCOMPANY

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3466904

3 Linear Regression – Estimation of an Optimal Hedge Ratio 19

4 Hypothesis Testing – Example 1: Hedging Revisited 26

5 Hypothesis Testing – Example 2: The CAPM 29

6 Sample Output for Multiple Hypothesis Tests 34

7 Multiple Regression Using an APT-Style Model 35

9 Calculating Principal Components 45

11 Constructing ARMA Models 70

12 Forecasting Using ARMA Models 78

13 Estimating Exponential Smoothing Models 82

15 The Generalised Method of Moments 87

16 Vector Autoregressive (VAR) Models 91

17 Testing for Unit Roots 100

18 Cointegration Tests and Modelling Cointegrated Systems 104

19 Volatility Modelling 116

20 Modelling Seasonality in Financial Data 129

21 Panel Data Models 134

22 Limited Dependent Variable Models 145

23 Simulation Methods 154

24 Value at Risk 162

25 The Fama–MacBeth Procedure 168

1.2 What Does Stata Look Like?

1.3 Getting Help

Numeric or String Data

Continuous, Categorical, and Indicator Variables

2.2 Formats and Variable Labels

2.3 Data Input and Saving

2.4 Data Description

Figure 3: Generating Summary Statistics

rename (AverageHousePrice) (hp)

2.6 Generating New Variables

Table 1: Commonly Used Operators

Z/2 Dividing == (exactly) equal to

Figure 6: The Variables Manager Window

Figure 7: Changing the Format Type for a Monthly Date Variable

Figure 8: Declaring Your Dataset to be Time-Series Data

Figure 9: Generating Simple Percentage Changes in House Prices

Figure 11: Line Plot of the Average House Price Series

Figure 12: Creating a Histogram

2.9 Saving Data and Results

Figure 13: Importing Time-Series Data into Stata

Figure 15: Variables Manager for S&P Dataset

Figure 17: Declare Dataset to be Time-Series Data

Figure 18: Computing Continuously Compounded Returns

generate rspot = 100*(ln(Spot)-ln(L.Spot))

Figure 19: Generating Summary Statistics

The following summary statistics appear in the Output window:

Figure 20: Estimating OLS Regressions

regress Spot Futures

Figure 21: Postestimation Selector

Figure 22: Specifying the Wald Linear Hypothesis Test

Figure 23: Generating Continuously Compounded Returns

Figure 24: Generating a Time-Series Plot of Two Series

Figure 26: Generating a Scatter Plot of Two Series

(RF ord − rf )t = α + β(RM − rf )t + ut (1)

ersandp dprod dcredit dinflation dmoney dspread rterm

Figure 28: Multiple Hypothesis Test for APT-Style Model

∆HPt = µ + ϕ∆HPt−1 + θt−1 + t , (6)