FMOLS Summary
Posted: Mon Apr 20, 2020 4:51 am
Hello everybody,
my question is regarding the summary of the function cointreg(). The Eviews unser's guide states "The summary statistic portion of the output is relatively familiar but does require a bit of comment. First, all of the descriptive and fit statistics are computed using the original data, not the FMOLS transformed data. Thus, while the measures of fit and the Durbin-Watson stat may be of casual interest, you should exercise extreme caution in using these measures."
I took two dara sets and ran an regular OLS and the FMOLS. The fit statistic R-squared was still diffrerent for both estimations. According to the statement I believe they should be the same values. Can I trust the fit values of the FMOLS or not? What is the reason for not computing the fit statistics with the FMOLS trasformed data.
Thank you in advance
Pedro
my question is regarding the summary of the function cointreg(). The Eviews unser's guide states "The summary statistic portion of the output is relatively familiar but does require a bit of comment. First, all of the descriptive and fit statistics are computed using the original data, not the FMOLS transformed data. Thus, while the measures of fit and the Durbin-Watson stat may be of casual interest, you should exercise extreme caution in using these measures."
I took two dara sets and ran an regular OLS and the FMOLS. The fit statistic R-squared was still diffrerent for both estimations. According to the statement I believe they should be the same values. Can I trust the fit values of the FMOLS or not? What is the reason for not computing the fit statistics with the FMOLS trasformed data.
Thank you in advance
Pedro