Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
960872 | Journal of Financial Markets | 2014 | 12 Pages |
Abstract
ELO (2014) dispute our findings. This note reviews the econometric methodology and the market microstructure arguments behind our conclusions and responds to a number of inaccurate assertions. In addition, we summarize fresh empirical evidence that corroborates the hypothesis that VPIN is largely driven, and significantly distorted, by the volume and volatility innovations. Furthermore, we note there is compelling new evidence that transaction-based classification schemes are more accurate than the bulk volume strategies advocated by ELO for constructing VPIN. In fact, using perfect classification leads to diametrically opposite results relative to ELO (2011a, 2012a).
Related Topics
Social Sciences and Humanities
Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Economics and Econometrics
Authors
Torben G. Andersen, Oleg Bondarenko,