Annualizing Discrete-Return Volatility with Log-Return Assumptions
Summary
The document explains why the familiar square-root-of-time scaling for volatility applies directly to aggregated log returns under zero autocorrelation, but not generally to discrete returns. It first expresses the variance of an aggregate log return in terms of single-period variance and serial autocorrelations; when all autocorrelations are zero, this reduces to period count times single-period variance.
For normally distributed log returns with zero autocorrelation and mean μ, the aggregate discrete return is obtained by exponentiating the aggregate log return and subtracting one. Its lognormal distribution gives a closed-form variance, which depends on both the mean and variance of log returns. The document notes that the difference between log-return and discrete-return volatility grows as these inputs increase, illustrating the issue for monthly aggregation. The result relies on normal log returns and the stated assumptions; it does not give a general method for non-normal returns or autocorrelated data. A cited paper is suggested for annual risk measures, but no empirical validation or further detail is included.
Key ideas
- Aggregated log-return variance depends on serial autocorrelation as well as single-period variance.
- With zero autocorrelation, log-return variance scales linearly with the number of periods.
- Discrete returns are lognormal transformations of normally distributed log returns under the stated model.
- The resulting discrete-return variance depends on both the log-return mean and variance.
- The closed-form treatment assumes normal log returns and zero autocorrelation.
Tags
Full text
# Annualization of discrete returns
# Annualization of discrete returns
There is a well known approach to annualize volatility of log-returns for a given frequency. Let $P(t)$ a price process and define a log return $r_l(t)$ as $$r_l(t) = \ln \left( \frac{P(t)}{P(t-1)} \right).$$
An aggregate return over $n$ periods is $$ \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} r_l^A(t) &= \ln \left( \frac{P(t)}{P(t-n)} \right) \\ &= \sum_{t-n+1}^t r_l(i). \end{aligned} \end{equation} $$
Let $\sigma_l^2$ denote variance of log-returns. Then, variance of an aggregate return is $$ \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} Var[r_l^A] &= Var \left[ \sum_{i=t-n+1}^t r_l(i) \right] \\ &= \left( n + 2\sum^{t-1}_{i=1} (n-i) \rho(i) \right) \times \sigma^2, \end{aligned} \end{equation} $$ where $\rho(i)$ is an autocorrelation of order $i$.
If observed series has autocorrelations zero for all lags than this simplifies to $$Var[r_l^A] = n \times \sigma^2.$$
The formula is, however, not valid for discrete returns. One could argue that it is a good approximation for higher frequencies since log-returns are close to discrete ones, but how would annualize volatility of discrete returns for, say, weekly or monthly data?
### Normal log-returns case
For a case when log-returns are normally distributed, we can derive a closed form solution for a variance of aggregated dicrete returns. In the below I assume that all autocorrelations are zero to simplify formulas and that $E[r_l(t)] = \mu$.
(Aggregated) Discrete return is related to a log-return via $$r_d^A(t) = \exp (r_l^A(t)) - 1,$$ which means that $r_d^A(t)$ is log-normally distributed with variance $$Var[r_d^A(t)] = \exp \left( n Var[r_l^A(t)] - 1 \right) \times \exp \left( 2n\mu + nVar[r_l^A(t)] \right).$$
This is a monotonically increasing function in a mean of log-returns, $\mu$, as well as in their variance, $Var[r_l^A(t)]$. Below are two figures that illustrate that the divergence between the two volatilities (took square root of the above variances) increase as $\mu$ and $Var[r_l^A(t)]$ increase (number of aggregation periods is $12$ for monthly data).
## Answer by Nipper (score 0)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/68028
If I have understood your question correctly then you might be interested in the following paper: Weber, A. E. Annual risk measures and related statistics. Applied paper Ortec Finance Research Center (8 2017).
You should be able to download a copy here.Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.