Abstract
This paper examines the accuracy of break point estimation using the endogenous break unit root tests of Zivot and Andrews (1992) and Perron (1997). We find that these tests tend to identify the break point incorrectly at one‐period behind (TB‐1) the true break point (TB), where bias in estimating the persistence parameter and spurious rejections are the greatest. In addition, this outcome occurs under the null and alternative hypotheses, and more so as the magnitude of the break increases. Consequences of utilizing these endogenous break tests are similar to (incorrectly) omitting the break term Bt in Perron's (1989) exogenous test.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
