You are not logged in. You can browse but not post. Login or Register by clicking 'Login or Register' at the top-right of this page. For more information on Statalist, see the FAQ.
''You can always run the ARDL model in levels no matter whether your variables are I(0), I(1), or a mixture of both. The ec and ec1 options are just reparameterizations of the ARDL model, another way of displaying the results, but the underlying estimation is the same as without these options.''
Please is the above statement the reason why you said even when the ardl is run with the ec1 or ec option and there is no co-integration we can still maintain the sr and lr results? If not please kindly provide me with the reasons.
If the speed-of-adjustment coefficient is not equal to zero (based on the t-test with asymptotic critical value bounds by Pesaran et al. (2001), see estat btest after ardl) and the corresponding long-run coefficients of the I(1) regressors are zero (otherwise this would be a contradiction to the claim that there is no cointegration), then the dependent variable is I(0) and there can be long-run effects from other I(0) variables.
The situations below are what I am encountering so please kindly check and see what can be done.
1. Please see the results below where lnsubisdies was stationary at both the levels and after first difference with all other remaining variables being stationary only after first difference and please make suggestions accordingly since the estat btest did not show the existence of co-integration.
Pesaran/Shin/Smith (2001) ARDL Bounds Test H0: no levels relationship F = 1.525 t = -2.453
Critical Values (0.1-0.01), F-statistic, Case 3
| [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | L_1 L_1 | L_05 L_05 | L_025 L_025 | L_01 L_01 ------+----------------+----------------+----------------+--------------- k_4 | 2.45 3.52 | 2.86 4.01 | 3.25 4.49 | 3.74 5.06 accept if F < critical value for I(0) regressors reject if F > critical value for I(1) regressors
Critical Values (0.1-0.01), t-statistic, Case 3
| [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | L_1 L_1 | L_05 L_05 | L_025 L_025 | L_01 L_01 ------+----------------+----------------+----------------+--------------- k_4 | -2.57 -3.66 | -2.86 -3.99 | -3.13 -4.26 | -3.43 -4.60 accept if t > critical value for I(0) regressors reject if t < critical value for I(1) regressors
k: # of non-deterministic regressors in long-run relationship Critical values from Pesaran/Shin/Smith (2001)
2. Also Please see theexamples below where lnGDP (dep. var) and lngrofiscdfct were stationary at both the levels and after first difference with all other remaining variables being stationary only after first difference and please make suggestions accordingly since the estat btest did not show the existence of co-integration.
Pesaran/Shin/Smith (2001) ARDL Bounds Test
H0: no levels relationship F = 3.323
t = -1.316
Critical Values (0.1-0.01), F-statistic, Case 3
| [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1]
| L_1 L_1 | L_05 L_05 | L_025 L_025 | L_01 L_01
------+----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------
k_4 | 2.45 3.52 | 2.86 4.01 | 3.25 4.49 | 3.74 5.06
accept if F < critical value for I(0) regressors
reject if F > critical value for I(1) regressors
Critical Values (0.1-0.01), t-statistic, Case 3
| [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1] | [I_0] [I_1]
| L_1 L_1 | L_05 L_05 | L_025 L_025 | L_01 L_01
------+----------------+----------------+----------------+---------------
k_4 | -2.57 -3.66 | -2.86 -3.99 | -3.13 -4.26 | -3.43 -4.60
accept if t > critical value for I(0) regressors
reject if t < critical value for I(1) regressors
k: # of non-deterministic regressors in long-run relationship
Critical values from Pesaran/Shin/Smith (2001)
3. In this third example lngdp (depvar) and lnntprmr_dfct were stationary at both the levels and after first difference with all other remaining variables being stationary only after first difference but there was no co-integration. Please what do you suggest?
In all three cases, essentially you cannot reject the null hypothesis of no long-run relationship with the bounds testing procedure. There is nothing wrong with these regressions (provided that your choice of the lag orders is not too conservative). Maybe you want to add a time trend to you regression - see the option trendvar() of ardl - since macroeconomic variables often exhibit a trending behavior.
The best defense is that the estimates are still consistent even if there is no cointegration. In addition, there is of course always the (small) chance that the bounds test incorrectly did not reject the null hypothesis even though it is not true. The ARDL / EC estimates are also robust to the latter situation.
Hello everyone, When I run ARDL model the error << r(9) "# of lag permutations (2500) exceeds setting of 'maxcombs' (500)>> appeared. What should I do ?
This error message tells you that you are trying to estimate a large number of models (more than 500) because you are allowing for large orders and probably have a relatively large number of exogenous variables. The error message is implemented as a device to encourage you to think again whether you really want to estimate such large models.
You can increase the allowed number of lag combinations by setting a higher number # with the option maxcombs(#). Depending on the size of your model, the estimations might take a long time. I would recommend in this case to combine this option with the options fast and dots.
Alternatively, you can reduce the actual number of lag combinations by pre-specifying fixed lag numbers for some variables with the lags(numlist) option or by restricting the maximum number of allowed lags for some (or all) variables with the maxlags(numlist) option.
For details about all of these options, please see the ardl help file.
Comment