Clustered Network Connectedness: A New Measurement Framework with Application to Global Equity Markets

Bastien Buchwalter; Francis X. Diebold; Kamil Yilmaz

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2502.15458

Clustered Network Connectedness: A New Measurement Framework with Application to Global Equity Markets

Bastien Buchwalter·Francis X. Diebold·Kamil Yilmaz

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Network connections, both across and within markets, are central in countless economic contexts. In recent decades, a large literature has developed and applied flexible methods for measuring network connectedness and its evolution, based on variance decompositions from vector autoregressions (VARs), as in Diebold and Yilmaz (2014). Those VARs are, however, typically identified using full orthogonalization (Sims, 1980), or no orthogonalization (Koop, Pesaran and Potter, 1996; Pesaran and Shin, 1998), which, although useful, are special and extreme cases of a more general framework that we develop in this paper. In particular, we allow network nodes to be connected in ``clusters", such as asset classes, industries, regions, etc., where shocks are orthogonal across clusters (Sims style orthogonalized identification) but correlated within clusters (Koop-Pesaran-Potter-Shin style generalized identification), so that the ordering of network nodes is relevant across clusters but irrelevant within clusters. After developing the clustered connectedness framework, we apply it in a detailed empirical exploration of sixteen country equity markets spanning three global regions.

Explore related subjects

econ.EM q-fin.ST stat.AP

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Bastien Buchwalter, Francis X. Diebold, Kamil Yilmaz. 2025-12-18. Clustered Network Connectedness: A New Measurement Framework with Application to Global Equity Markets. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.15458

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Difference-in-Differences with Unpoolable Data

Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this study, we identify and relax the assumption of data poolability in DID estimation. We propose an innovative approach to estimate DID with unpoolable data (UN-DID) which can accommodate covariates, multiple groups, and staggered adoption. Through analytical proofs and Monte Carlo simulations, we show that UN-DID and conventional DID estimates of the average treatment effect and standard errors are equal and unbiased in settings without covariates. With covariates, both methods produce estimates that are unbiased, equivalent, and converge to the true value. The estimates differ slightly but the statistical inference and substantive conclusions remain the same. Two empirical examples with real-world data further underscore UN-DID's utility. The UN-DID method allows the estimation of cross-jurisdictional treatment effects with unpoolable data, enabling better counterfactuals to be used and new research questions to be answered.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2026

The Promise of Time-Series Foundation Models for Agricultural Forecasting: Evidence from Commodity Prices

Forecasting agricultural markets remains challenging due to nonlinear dynamics, structural breaks, and sparse data. A long-standing belief holds that simple time-series methods outperform more advanced alternatives. This paper provides the first systematic evidence that this belief no longer holds with modern time-series foundation models (TSFMs). Using USDA ERS monthly commodity price data from 1997-2025, we evaluate 17 forecasting approaches across four model classes, including traditional time-series, machine learning, deep learning, and five state-of-the-art TSFMs (Chronos, Chronos-2, TimesFM 2.5, Time-MoE, Moirai-2), and construct annual marketing year price predictions to compare with USDA's futures-based season-average price (SAP) forecasts. We show that zero-shot foundation models consistently outperform traditional time-series methods, machine learning, and deep learning architectures trained from scratch in both monthly and annual forecasting. Furthermore, foundation models remarkably outperform USDA's futures-based forecasts on three of four major commodities despite USDA's information advantage from forward-looking futures markets. Time-MoE delivers the largest accuracy gains, achieving 54.9% improvement on wheat and 18.5% improvement on corn relative to USDA ERS benchmarks on recent data (2017-2024 excluding COVID). These results point to a paradigm shift in agricultural forecasting.

econ.EM↗

arXiv2026

Testing for Monotone Equilibrium Strategies in Games of Incomplete Information

This paper develops a unified framework for testing monotonicity of Bayesian Nash equilibrium strategies in unobserved types in games of incomplete information. We show that, under symmetric independent private types, monotonicity of differentiable equilibrium strategies is equivalent to monotonicity of a quasi-inverse strategy identified from observed actions. This allows the problem to be reformulated as testing a countable set of moment inequalities involving unconditional expectations. We propose a Cramer-von Mises-type statistic with bootstrap critical values. The method accommodates covariates and game heterogeneity. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate finite-sample performance, and an application to procurement auctions illustrates cartel detection.

econ.EM↗