In the presence of bubbles, asset prices consist of a fundamental and a bubble component, with the bubble component following an explosive dynamic. The general idea for bubble identification is to apply explosive root tests to a proxy of the unobservable bubble. Three notable proxies are the real asset prices, log price-payoff ratios, and estimated non-fundamental components. The rationale for all three proxy choices rests on the definition of bubbles, which has been presented in various forms in the literature. This chapter provides a theoretical framework that incorporates several definitions of bubbles (and fundamentals) and offers guidance for selecting proxies. For explosive root tests, we introduce the recursive evolving test of Phillips et al. (2015b,c) along with its asymptotic properties. This procedure can serve as a real-time monitoring device and has been shown to outperform several other tests. Like all other recursive testing procedures, the PSY algorithm faces the issue of multiplicity in testing that contaminates conventional significance values. To address this issue, we propose a multiple-testing algorithm to determine appropriate test critical values and show its satisfactory performance in finite samples by simulations. To illustrate, we conduct a pseudo real-time bubble monitoring exercise in the S&P 500 stock market from January 1990 to June 2020. The empirical results reveal the importance of using a good proxy for bubbles and addressing the multiplicity issue.
Housing fever is a popular term to describe an overheated housing market or housing price bubble. Like other financial asset bubbles, housing fever can inflict harm on the real economy, as indeed the US housing bubble did in the period following 2006 leading up to the general financial crisis and great recession. One contribution that econometricians can make to minimize the harm created by a housing bubble is to provide a quantitative `thermometer’ for diagnosing ongoing housing fever. Early diagnosis can enable prompt and effective policy action that reduces long term damage to the real economy. This paper provides a selective review of the relevant literature on econometric methods for identifying housing bubbles together with some new methods of research and an empirical application. We first present a technical definition of a housing bubble that facilitates empirical work and discuss significant difficulties encountered in practical work and the solutions that have been proposed in the past literature. A major challenge in all econometric identification procedures is to assess prices in relation to fundamentals, which requires measurement of fundamentals. One solution to address this challenge is to estimate the fundamental component from an underlying structural relationship involving measurable variables. A second aim of the paper is to improve the estimation accuracy of fundamentals by means of an easy-to-implement reduced-form approach. Since many of the relevant variables that determine fundamentals are nonstationary and interdependent we use the IVX (Phillips and Magdalinos, 2009) method to estimate the reduced-form model to reduce the finite sample bias which arises from highly persistent regressors and endogeneity. The recursive evolving test of Phillips, Shi and Yu (2015) is applied to the estimated non-fundamental component for the identification of speculative bubbles. The new bubble test developed here is referred to as PSY-IVX. An empirical application to the eight Australian capital city housing markets over the period 1999 to 2017 shows that bubble testing results are sensitive to different ways of controlling for fundamentals and highlights the importance of accurate estimation of these housing market fundamentals.
This paper re-examines changes in the causal link between money and income in the United States for over the past half century (1959 - 2014). Three methods for the data-driven discovery of change points in causal relationships are proposed, all of which can be implemented without prior detrending of the data. These methods are a forward recursive algorithm, a recursive rolling algorithm and the rolling window algorithm all of which utilize subsample tests of Granger causality within a lag-augmented vector autoregressive framework. The limit distributions for these subsample Wald tests are provided. The results from a suite of simulation experiments suggest that the rolling window algorithm provides the most reliable results, followed by the recursive rolling method. The forward expanding window procedure is shown to have worst performance. All three approaches find evidence of money-income causality during the Volcker period in the 1980s. The rolling and recursive rolling algorithms detect two additional causality episodes: the turbulent period of late 1960s and the starting period of the subprime mortgage crisis in 2007.