A note on upper bounds for forecast-value-added relative to naïve forecasts
In forecast value added analysis, the accuracy of relatively sophisticated forecasting methods is compared to that of naïve 1 forecasts to see whether the extra costs and effort of implementing them are justified. In this note, we derive a ratio that indicates the upper bound of a forecasting method’s accuracy relative to naïve 1 forecasts when the mean squared error is used to measure one-period-ahead accuracy. The ratio is applicable when a series is stationary or when its first differences are stationary. Formulae for the ratio are presented for several exemplar time series processes.
Keywordsforecasting forecast accuracy ARIMA models
- Gilliland M (2011). Value added analysis: Business forecasting effectiveness, Analytics, July/August.Google Scholar
- Hyndman RJ and Athanasopoulos G (2014). Forecasting: Principles and Practice. OTexts: Melbourne.Google Scholar
- McLaughlin RL (1983). Forecasting models—Sophisticated or naive. Journal of Forecasting 2(3):274.Google Scholar
- Morlidge S (2014). Using relative error metrics to improve forecasting quality in the supply chain. Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting 34:39–46.Google Scholar
- Theil H (1971). Applied Economic Forecasting. North-Holland Publishing Company: Amsterdam.Google Scholar