Skip to content
All library documents

Why Autocorrelation Is Misleading for Nonstationary Price Series

Article Quant Q&A · Author: user96624

Summary

This exchange asks whether autocorrelation can describe persistence in nonstationary financial data, including prices, returns, and volatility. The response explains that the autocorrelation function relies on finite, stable autocovariances, a condition that fails for a unit-root process. In a random walk, the variance grows over time, so the relevant autocovariance is not well defined; sample autocorrelations can also rise with the length of the sample.

The reply notes that a time trend can also make prices nonstationary and that autocorrelation analysis of such levels is inappropriate. Differencing can address many of these issues, after which stationarity should be assessed before interpreting autocorrelations. The explanation is a conceptual caution rather than a comparison of specific tests or a guide to every kind of nonstationarity, such as volatility clustering or deterministic trends.

Key ideas

  • The ADF test evaluates evidence of a unit root, while the autocorrelation function summarizes dependence under stationarity assumptions.
  • For a unit-root process, variance grows over time and autocovariances are not well defined.
  • Sample autocorrelations of nonstationary data can appear stronger as the sample grows.
  • Assess stationarity and consider differencing before interpreting autocorrelation.

Tags

Full text
# Persistence and stationarity together in volatility analysis


# Persistence and stationarity together in volatility analysis












I am trying to analyse a time series. I want to get only quantitative results (so, I'm excluding things like "looking at this plot we can note..." or "as you can see in the chart ...").

In my job, I analyse stationarity and persistence. First, I run ADF test and get "stationary" or "non-stationary" as results. Then, I need to work on persistence. To do so, I use ACF.

My question is: suppose I got "non-stationary" time series. Is it right to run ACF on it (without differencing)? I would like to comment upon stationarity and persistency without having to differentiate (so, just run tests on the original data and getting "answers" like "strong positive persistence", "weak negative persistence", ...).

I am writing here my question since I am working on close prices, returns and volatility. The time series are about them and I am trying to see if there are "better" time series than others (looking at general time series characteristics as non-stationarity...).

Thanks to who will even just read my question.

## Answer by fes (score 1)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/69189

ADF tests for a unit root. Autocorrelation function of a unit root process does not make sense. For example let

$$y_{t+1}=y_t+\epsilon_{t+1}$$

Here $\epsilon_t$ is i.i.d white noise. Then the one period autocovariance is

$$Cov(y_{t+1},y_{t})=Cov(y_t+\epsilon_{t+1},y_{t})=Var(y_t)$$

For a unit root process $Var(y_t) \rightarrow \infty$ as $t\rightarrow \infty$. This autocovariance is hence not well defined and the sample autocorrelations grow as the sample length increases . If your data features a unit root you should not look at autocorrelations.

Note that prices are rather non-stationary because of a time trend. Here it would be equally wrong to look at autocorrelation functions. But you can solve most of these issues by taking differences. But all in all: only look at autocorrelations if your variable is stationary.

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.