Просмотров: 1

- Academic.udayton.edu-Using SPSS for T-Tests
- 6b
- quantitative tech in business
- Human Errors Reduction
- Erikson Et Al. - Dyadic Analysis in International Relations-A Cautionary Tale
- a04v8n3
- I 7BusinessResearchMethods
- Introduction.ppt
- 09
- PSYC2012 Research Method
- 13 Vinh_Introduction to BIOSTATISTICS
- QNT 561 NERD Learn by Doing/qnt561nerd.com
- termprojectnicholaswoolley
- stats_statcrunch_card.pdf
- 119450_EEM1026assignment
- part 6- hypothesis tests
- MBA103
- Factors Influencing the User Acceptance of E-Banking in Bangladesh: An Empirical Study
- 1958-3451-1-SM
- How Not to Write Results

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 17

MGARCH and Realized Volatilities

January 21, 2019

Abstract

This study tests the uncovered interest rate parity between the Brazil-

ian and American markets during the period of June 1986 to August 2016.

The validation of the uncovered parity condition implies efficiency be-

tween markets. The condition is tested through the VECM methodology

proposed in Engle and Granger (1987) utilizing the cointegrating vector

testing the uncovered parity on the long term. The Multivariate GARCH

model proposed by Bollerslev, Engle, and Wooldridge (1988) is used, mod-

eling not only the mean but the variance of the model’s variables, that way

controlling the ARCH (autoregressive conditional heteroscedastic) effect

in financial series. The variances of the variables are estimated through

the Realized Variance estimator, first proposed in Andersen and Boller-

slev (1998), in which the authors show it to be a consistent estimate of the

integrated variance of a given process. The results validate the uncovered

interest parity, showing it to be valid as a long-term equilibrium and that

any deviation is corrected in the long term through the exchange rate

between Brazil and the United States.

1 Introduction

The uncovered interest rate parity (UIP) is an expected relation in the ex-

change rate market that, when valid, shows that investments with equal returns

will yield the same result regardless if the investment is being made in the in-

vestor’s native country or in a foreign country MacDonald (2007). In markets

where the UIP is valid there is no possibility of arbitrage for investors, as such

the UIP is regarded as a inter-market efficiency measure Sarno (2003).

In this article we test the validity of the UIP between the Brazilian and

the American markets. Our model takes in account the period between June

1986 and August 2016. To test the UIP hypothesis we model the USA-Brazil

exchange rate based on it’s time series and the basic interest rate of both coun-

tries. The results of our model will show whether the UIP is corroborated or

not.

To accurately model the phenomena in question we utilize the VEC (Vector

Error Correcting) methodology first presented in Engle and Granger (1987). In

conjunction we utilize a GARCH model as established in Bollerslev (1986) to

better account for stylized facts inherent in financial time series, among those

excess kurtosis and volatility clustering as pointed out in Mandelbrot (1997).

1

Our model also uses realized volatility (RV) estimators proposed in Andersen

and Bollerslev (1998) to get consistent estimations of the integrated variance of

a time series.

Our results show positive results for the validity of the UIP condition. with

the Error Correcting Vector (ECM) showing statistical significance and results

that corroborate the UIP.

On the next section features a brief review of the UIP condition followed by

our econometric model and finally our results and conclusions.

The Uncovered Interest Rate Parity (UIP) is a theoretical model to un-

derstand the relationship between interest rates and exchange rates between

international markets (MacDonald, 2007) one of the conclusions given by the

UIP is that if the condition holds, there is no possibility of arbitrage between

markets (MacDonald, 2007). As such results from empirical models that test

the validity of the UIP are used as a proxy for measuring the efficiency between

two international markets (Sarno, 2003).

In a markets that are efficient, There is no possibility of arbitrage between

different investments, by that we mean that investment of similar risk and return

will yield the same return, independently of whether the investor is domestic or

foreign (MacDonald, 2007)

Mathematically, the UIP is represented in equation (1):

e

St+k − St = it − i∗t (1)

e

In which St+k is the spot exchange rate in a future moment k periods from

the present period t. The superscript e indicates that this is the expected value

of o the exchange rate as expected by the market.St is the nominal value of the

spot exchange rate today and (it − i∗t ) is the differential between the domestic

interest rate and the foreign interest rate. All values are in their logarithmic

form MacDonald (2007); Sarno (2003).

The empirical literature surrounding the theme of the UIP is conflicting hav-

ing empirical papers that utilize a variety of empirical tools and models testing

the condition in a variety of country dyads and groups of countries. Their

findings vary between corroborating the UIP with empirical evidence (Byrne &

Nagayasu, 2012; Czudaj & Prüser, 2015; Wagner, 2012), being unable to find any

proof of the condition holding (Georgoutsos & Kouretas, 2016; Juselius & Mac-

Donald, 2004; Lily, Kogid, Mulok, & Asid, 2012; Živkov, Njegić, Momčilović, &

Milenković, 2016) and mixed results with the condition holding between certain

countries and not in some (Chang & Su, 2015; NUSAIR, 2013).

In Brazil, the few tests of the UIP are always between the Brazilian and

American markets. The works of dos Santos Souza e Silva and Curado (2013)

and Cieplinski (2015) find no evidence for the UIP’s validity. In opposition the

work of Marçal, Pereira, and dos Santos Filho (2003) finds through a cointe-

grated VAR evidence for the UIP.

2

3 Data

In the following section we present the relevant data captured to be used

in our empirical model. First, we present the raw data and it’s characteristics,

followed by transformed data that was used in the empirical model.

3.1.1 Commercial Exchange Rate

Figure 1 shows the exchange rate between the Brazilian Real and the Amer-

ican Dollar. The exchange rate time series was captured directly from the

Brazilian Central Bank and goes from 01/02/1985 to 19/08/2016 with a daily

frequency. The daily values are composed by the mean of intraday transactions.

Figure 2 shows the evolution of the Brazilian base interest rate through time.

The interest rate time series was captured directly from the Brazilian Central

Bank and goes from 06/04/1986 to 20/09/2016 with a daily frequency. The

interest rate is in a per month scale.

3

Figure 2: SELIC Interest Rate (% p.m) - Daily

Figure 3 shows the evolution of the American base interest rate through time.

The interest rate time series was captured directly from the Federal Reserve and

goes from 07/01/1954 to 26/09/2016 with a daily frequency. The interest rate

is in a per year scale.

3.2.1 Second Difference of Commercial Exchange Rate Returns (DDLEx)

Using the standard augmented Dickey-Fuller unit root test we determined

that the first difference of the exchange rate was insufficient in making the

variable stationary as such the second difference was used. Figure 4 shows the

transformed variable’s graph, while table 1 shows the unit root test.

4

Figure 4: Second Difference of Monthly Exchange Rate Returns (DDLEx)

D-Lag t-adf Beta Y 1 Sigma

0 -27.82*** -0.35781 0.07342

The first difference of the SELIC rate returns was taken to make the variable

stationary. Figure 5 show it’s graph and table 2 shows the ADF test.

D-Lag t-adf Beta Y 1 Sigma

0 -16.02 0.18519 0.03288

5

3.2.3 First Difference of Federal Fund rate Returns (DLFF)

The first difference of the Federal Fund rate returns was taken to make the

variable stationary. Figure 6 show it’s graph and table 3 shows the ADF test.

D-Lag t-adf Beta Y 1 Sigma

0 -30.72 -0.43502 0.000622

Following the methodology first put forth by Engle and Granger (1987) and

then expanded in (Johansen, 1991) and informed by the restrictions imposed by

the the UIP theory, we build an ECM following the equation:

The result is presented in figure 7 and an ADF test is made to show the

stationarity of this ECM, the results are shown in table 4.

6

Figure 7: Error Correcting Model (ECM)

D-Lag t-adf Beta Y 1 Sigma

0 -17.54 0.0895 0.05269

The realized volatility estimator proposed in (Andersen & Bollerslev, 1998)

is proven to be a consistent estimator of the integrated variance of a process.

We utilize daily data to avoid the bias generated by microstructure market

noise. We utilize the realized volatility estimator in both the mean and variance

equation of our MGARCH model. The estimator is calculated according to the

following equation proposed in (Andersen & Bollerslev, 1998):

M

X

2

V Rt = rt,i (3)

i=1

In which, r2 are the quadratic returns, t is the counter for lower frequency

period and i is a counter from 1 to M . where M is the maximum high frequency

observations. In this article, t represents the monthly frequency and i represents

the daily frequency.

On figure 8 we see the graph of the VR ECM.

7

Figure 8: Realized Volatility of ECM (VR ECM)

4 Model

To properly capture the dynamic of this phenomena and empirically validate

the UIP, our empirical model has utilized several different econometric tools. To

capture the volatility clustering effect inherent to financial time series, as evi-

denced in Mandelbrot (1997), we utilize the GARCH methodology put forth in

Bollerslev (1986) due to modeling both the mean and volatility of a time series.

Due to all series being integrated, we also utilize the Vector Error Correcting

Model put forth by Engle and Granger (1987) and impose in the Error Correct-

ing Vector the UIP condition, in which the domestic and foreign interest rates

and the exchange rate have to be equal in the long term.

Due to the multivariate nature of the VECM model, we utilize the MGARCH

model, first used in Bollerslev et al. (1988). Finally, we add the realized volatility

estimator to both the mean and variance equations.

As a result our model is given by the following equations:

yt = Cxt + εt (4)

ht = $ + γV R + α(εt−1 ε0t−1 ) + βht−1 (5)

p

εt = ht zt (6)

xt is a vector with the variables DDLExt−1 , DLSELICt−1 , DLF Ft , DLF Ft−1 ,

ECMt−1 and V R ECMt−1 .

In equation 5, $ is the unconditioned variance-covariance matrix. V R is

a vector containing the variable V R ECM . The term (εt−1 ε0t−1 ) conditions

the variance on the model’s errors while ht−1 conditions the contemporaneous

variance with the past variance.

To better capture the excess kurtosis related to financial time series, inference

is made using the T distribution and not a standard Gaussian distribution.

In our model the parameter related to the variable ECMt−1 is our parameter

of interest, it represents the long term relationship given by the UIP. If this

parameter is statistically significant it will point to the corroboration of the UIP

between the Brazilian and American markets. However, if this parameter is not

8

statistically significant in any equation, we have no evidence for the validity of

UIP condition in these markets.

As the proposed model is a bivariate model, only one cointegrating relation-

ship is possible, therefore it is also expected that the parameter for the variable

ECMt−1 be statistically significant in one one of the equation of the model,

that will point to how the system adjusts itself towards equilibrium, with the

equation with the significant parameter being the one doing the adjustment.

4.1 Results

The following table shows the results of our model.

Mean Equation

Variable Coef. St. Error T- Stat P-value

Constant -0.0044 0.001472 -3.009 0.0028***

DDLEx 1 -0.2156 0.073164 -2.947 0.0034***

DLSELIC 1 -0.0289 0.16336 -0.177 0.8597

DLFF 0.5593 0.66227 0.845 0.399

DLFF 1 0.5431 0.88005 0.617 0.5376

ECM 1 0.4697 0.12309 3.816 0.0002***

VR ECM 1 -0.0003 0.000001 -29.39 0.0000***

Variance Equation

Variable Coef. St. Error T- Stat P-value

Uncond. Variance 0.0021 0.001112 1.898 0.0586*

Uncond, Covariance -0.0002 0.000243 -0.725 0.469

b 1 0.8144 0.027711 29.39 0.0000***

a 1 0.5803 0.053843 10.78 0.0000***

VR ECM 1 -0.0042 0.001844 -2.296 0.0223**

P-values marked with * are significant at a 10% level, ** at a 5% level,

and *** at a 1%.

9

Table 6: Results for Equation DLSELIC

Mean Equation

Variable Coef. St. Error T- Stat P-value

Constant 0 0.000009 -0.498 0.6185

DDLEx 1 -0.0002 0.001718 -0.104 0.9174

DLSELIC 1 -0.283 0.091278 -3.1 0.0021***

DLFF -0.0653 0.12452 -0.524 0.6005

DLFF 1 -0.1114 0.20911 -0.533 0.5946

ECM 1 -0.0017 0.001975 -0.852 0.3948

VR ECM 1 -0.0004 0.000005 -9.587 0.0000***

Variance Equation

Variable Coef. St. Error T- Stat P-value

Uncond. Variance 0.0004 0.00017 2.567 0.0107**

Uncond. Covariance -0.0002 0.000243 -0.725 0.469

b 1 0.7916 0.021741 36.41 0.0000***

a 1 0.611 0.050072 12.2 0.0000***

VR ECM 1 -0.0083 0.002963 -2.805 0.0053***

P-values marked with * are significant at a 10% level, ** at a 5% level, and

*** at a 1%.

WE observe that the parameter of interest for ECM1 shows statistical sig-

nificance in the equation for the DDLEx variable. To assess the quality of

these results we put our model through the standard tests of the Gauss-Markov

assumptions and other tests relevant to our model.

The following tables presents the test statistics for the Box/Pierce auto-

correlation test using the model’s standardized residuals. We present the test

statistics for 5, 10, 20 and 50 lags. The test’s null hypothesis is an absence of

autocorrelation.

Lags Test Statistics P-Value

Q(5) 0.4116 0.995003

Q(10) 0.4594 0.999996

Q(20) 0.9306 1.000000

Q(50) 3.0442 1.000000

10

Table 8: Q Autocorrelation Statistics for DLSELIC

Lags Test Statistics P-Value

Q(5) 7.2685 0.20143

Q(10) 14.1049 0.16826

Q(20) 28.0551 0.1081

Q(50) 51.2632 0.42392

Based on the test statistics, we show that the model has controlled the

autocorrelation effects. em both time series.

On tables 9 and 10 we present test statistics for the Box/Pierce ARCH effect

test done using the model’s quadratic standardized residuals. The test statistics

for 5, 10, 20 and 50 lags are presented. The test’s null hypothesis is an absence

of the ARCH effect.

Lags Test Statistics P-Value

Q(5) 0.0293 0.99999

Q(10) 0.0616 1.000000

Q(20) 0.1272 1.000000

Q(50) 0.3449 1.000000

Lags Test Statistics P-Value

Q(5) 0.0987 0.99984

Q(10) 1.6945 0.99819

Q(20) 2.9704 1.000000

Q(50) 5.2897 1.000000

Based on the ARCH tests presented, we determined that the model fully

captured the ARCH effect.

Normality is the fifth and only optional Gauss-Markov assumption. While

it’s presence is not necessary for non-biased and consistent parameters, it’s

presence implies not only that the estimators are non biased and consistent but

also the best linear unbiased estimators (BLUE). The following tables show tests

for asymmetry, excess kurtosis and the Jarque-Bera normality test.

11

Table 11: Normality Tests for DDLEx

Test Test Statistic T-Test P-Value

Asymmetry 12.7 98.77 0.0000

Excess Kurtosis 237.62 926.64 0.0000

Jarque-Bera Normality Test 856630 .NaN 0.0000

Test Test Statistic T-Test P-Value

Asymmetry 2.69 20.92 0.0000

Excess Kurtosis 37.1 144.67 0.0000

Jarque-Bera Normality Test 21079 .NaN 0.0000

Based on the test statistics presented, we observe residuals are not normal

in the model.

We apply the weak exogeneity test by variable addition put forth in Urbain

(1993) to test if the weak exogeneity condition exists between the two time se-

ries being modeled. If there is, it is possible to simplify our model to a more

parsimonious univariate model. The test consists of estimating the multivariate

model and adding the model’s residuals to a univariate model with the same

specification as the multivariate model. The residuals being statistically signif-

icant in the model implies that the relation between time series is not weakly

exogenous, and the full multivariate model must be maintained.

In our model, we sought to test if DLSELIC is weakly exogenous in rela-

tion to DDLEx. We estimate a GARCH(1,1) model with the dependent vari-

able DDLExt and independent variables DDLExt−1 , DLSELICt−1 , DLF Ft ,

DLF Ft−1 , ECMt−1 , V R ECMt−1 . The model results are presented in table

13.

Based on the results of this equation, we see that the residuals of DLSELIC

are significant in the model, pointing to DLSELIC being not weakly exogenous

in relation to DDLEx.

Figure 9 below shows the conditional correlation between the two estima-

tions.

12

Table 13: Results for Weak Exogeneity Test

Mean Equation

Variable Coef. St. Error T- Stat P-value

Constant -0.00434 0.001746 -2.488 0.0133**

DDLEx 1 -0.20755 0.073949 -2.807 0.0053***

DLSELIC 1 -0.12867 0.10423 -1.234 0.2179

DLFF 0.20976 0.74239 0.283 0.7777

DLFF 1 -0.04456 0.86549 -0.051 0.959

ECM 1 0.48491 0.11179 4.338 0.0000***

VR ECM 1 -0.00033 0.000001 -8.083 0.0000***

Res DLSELIC 1.00712 0.094215 10.69 0.0000***

Variance Equation

Variable Coef. St. Error T- Stat P-value

Uncond. Variance 0.00188 0.001159 1.623 0.1054

b1 0.79281 0.049556 16 0.0000***

a1 0.60946 0.081033 7.521 0.0000***

VR ECM 1 -0.00551 0.004282 -1.286 0.1994

Figure 10 shows the conditional variance of both estimations.

13

Figure 10: Conditional Variances

Figure 11 sohws the model’s standardized residuals.

5 Conclusion

The objective of this article is to empirically test the Uncovered Interest Par-

ity (UIP) condition between the Brazilian and the American market. Finding

evidences of this condition being valid is tantamount to saying there is efficiency

between markets, blocking investors from performing arbitrage.

The empirical literature presents work both proving and disproving the UIP

in different conditions. Works like Juselius and MacDonald (2004), Lily et al.

(2012), Živkov et al. (2016) show that the condition does not hold empirically.

in contrat, works like Marçal et al. (2003), Wagner (2012), NUSAIR (2013) show

the UIP is valid.

In our work, based on the results of our model, we observe that ECMt−1 is

statistically significant in the equation modeling the Real/Dollar exchange rate,

this shows that the long term relationship between the series that form the UIP

14

have a long term equilibrium relationship and that when the relation is outside

of equilibrium the exchange rate corrects to move towards it.

15

References

Andersen, T. G., & Bollerslev, T. (1998, nov). Answering the skeptics: Yes, stan-

dard volatility models do provide accurate forecasts. International Eco-

nomic Review , 39 (4), 885. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/

2527343 doi: 10.2307/2527343

Bollerslev, T. (1986, apr). Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedas-

ticity. Journal of Econometrics, 31 (3), 307–327. Retrieved from https://

doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(86)90063-1 doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(86)

90063-1

Bollerslev, T., Engle, R. F., & Wooldridge, J. M. (1988). A capital asset

pricing model with time-varying covariances. Journal of political Econ-

omy, 96 (1), 116–131. Retrieved from http://econ.duke.edu/~boller/

Published Papers/jpe 88.pdf

Byrne, J. P., & Nagayasu, J. (2012, jun). COMMON FACTORS OF THE

EXCHANGE RISK PREMIUM IN EMERGING EUROPEAN MAR-

KETS. Bulletin of Economic Research, 64 , s71–s85. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8586.2012.00447.x doi: 10.1111/

j.1467-8586.2012.00447.x

Chang, H.-L., & Su, C. W. (2015). Uncovered interest parity and monetary

integration in east asian countries based on china. The Journal of In-

ternational Trade & Economic Development, 24 (4), 451–464. Retrieved

from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09638199.2014

.920402

Cieplinski, A. (2015). Estimação do teorema da paridade descoberta da

taxa de juros para o brasil (phdthesis, Universidade Federal do Rio de

Janeiro). Retrieved from http://www.ie.ufrj.br/images/pesquisa/

publicacoes/discussao/2015/TD IE 004 2015 CIEPLINSKI BRAGA

SUMMA.pdf

Czudaj, R., & Prüser, J. (2015, feb). International parity relationships between

germany and the USA revisited: evidence from the post-DM period. Ap-

plied Economics, 47 (26), 2745–2767. Retrieved from https://doi.org/

10.1080/00036846.2015.1008776 doi: 10.1080/00036846.2015.1008776

dos Santos Souza e Silva, G. R., & Curado, M. L. (2013). Comportamento da

taxa de cÂmbio no brasil: Uma anÁlise a partir da paridade descoberta

da taxa de juros. Análise Econômica. Retrieved from http://www.seer

.ufrgs.br/AnaliseEconomica/article/download/17145/24670

Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987, mar). Co-integration and error

correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55 (2),

251. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236 doi: 10.2307/

1913236

Georgoutsos, D. A., & Kouretas, G. P. (2016, jul). Interest parity, cointegration,

and the term structure: Testing in an integrated framework. International

Review of Financial Analysis, 46 , 281–294. Retrieved from https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2015.12.001 doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2015.12.001

Johansen, S. (1991). Estimation and hypothesis testing of cointegration vectors

in gaussian vector autoregressive models. Econometrica: Journal of the

Econometric Society, 1551–1580. Retrieved from http://citec.repec

.org/d/ecm/emetrp/v 59 y 1991 i 6 p 1551-80.html

Juselius, K., & MacDonald, R. (2004, jan). International parity relationships

16

between the USA and japan. Japan and the World Economy, 16 (1), 17–

34. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/s0922-1425(03)00003-3

doi: 10.1016/s0922-1425(03)00003-3

Lily, J., Kogid, M., Mulok, D., & Asid, R. (2012). Revisiting uncovered interest

rate parity: An empirical testing using bounds test approach. Procedia

Economics and Finance, 2 , 45–52. Retrieved from https://doi.org/

10.1016/s2212-5671(12)00063-9 doi: 10.1016/s2212-5671(12)00063-9

MacDonald, R. (2007). Exchange rate economics: Theories and ev-

idence. ROUTLEDGE CHAPMAN HALL. Retrieved from

http://www.ebook.de/de/product/6142270/ronald macdonald

exchange rate economics theories and evidence.html

Mandelbrot, B. B. (1997). The variation of certain speculative prices. In Fractals

and scaling in finance (pp. 371–418). Springer New York. Retrieved

from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2763-0 14 doi: 10.1007/

978-1-4757-2763-0 14

Marçal, E. F., Pereira, P. L. V., & dos Santos Filho, O. C. (2003, mar). Paridade

do poder de compra: testando dados brasileiros. Revista Brasileira de

Economia, 57 (1), 159–190. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1590/

s0034-71402003000100006 doi: 10.1590/s0034-71402003000100006

NUSAIR, S. A. (2013, mar). EXAMINING THE UNDERLYING PARITY

CONDITIONS SUFFICIENT FOR REAL INTEREST PARITY FOR

ASIAN COUNTRIES. The Singapore Economic Review , 58 (01), 1350002.

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1142/s0217590813500021 doi:

10.1142/s0217590813500021

Sarno, L. (2003). Economics of exchange rates. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY

PRESS. Retrieved from http://www.ebook.de/de/product/2789259/

lucio sarno economics of exchange rates.html

Urbain, J.-P. (1993). Weak exogeneity in error correction models. In Lec-

ture notes in economics and mathematical systems (pp. 43–81). Springer

Berlin Heidelberg. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3

-642-95706-2 3 doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-95706-2 3

Wagner, C. (2012, sep). Risk-premia, carry-trade dynamics, and economic

value of currency speculation. Journal of International Money and Fi-

nance, 31 (5), 1195–1219. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/

j.jimonfin.2012.01.013 doi: 10.1016/j.jimonfin.2012.01.013

Živkov, D., Njegić, J., Momčilović, M., & Milenković, I. (2016). Exchange rate

volatility and uncovered interest rate parity in the european emerging

economies. Prague Economic Papers, 25 (3), 253–270. Retrieved from

http://www.vse.cz/polek/download.php?jnl=pep&pdf=562.pdf doi:

10.18267/j.pep.562

17

- Academic.udayton.edu-Using SPSS for T-TestsЗагружено:DarkAster12
- 6bЗагружено:Zafar Khan
- quantitative tech in businessЗагружено:Hashir Khan
- Human Errors ReductionЗагружено:NeenaRawat
- Erikson Et Al. - Dyadic Analysis in International Relations-A Cautionary TaleЗагружено:tzengyen
- a04v8n3Загружено:rgovindan123
- I 7BusinessResearchMethodsЗагружено:Imran Ali
- Introduction.pptЗагружено:karl_poor
- 09Загружено:Sandra Rodriguez
- PSYC2012 Research MethodЗагружено:M Yousuf Adam
- 13 Vinh_Introduction to BIOSTATISTICSЗагружено:Nueng Bovornpat
- QNT 561 NERD Learn by Doing/qnt561nerd.comЗагружено:kopiko83
- termprojectnicholaswoolleyЗагружено:api-319795406
- stats_statcrunch_card.pdfЗагружено:Eliana Lopez
- 119450_EEM1026assignmentЗагружено:Thaya Idhyomatic
- part 6- hypothesis testsЗагружено:api-339771906
- MBA103Загружено:SolvedSmuAssignments
- Factors Influencing the User Acceptance of E-Banking in Bangladesh: An Empirical StudyЗагружено:Syeda Rifat Ara
- 1958-3451-1-SMЗагружено:dewi ratna
- How Not to Write ResultsЗагружено:Milena Daniela Neira Rivas
- Stats Hypothesis TestingЗагружено:Lord Ezon
- Quiz 1 review questions (solutions).docxЗагружено:Steven Nguyen
- 17. Training Effectiveness of Emotional Intelligence on Academic Adjustmentamong Post Graduate Students-2019-02!14!10-03Загружено:Impact Journals
- 18.06.100_jurnal_eproc (1)Загружено:TsarHadhimasAkbar
- Journal Article Critique.pdfЗагружено:Izyan Athirah
- Practical Skills in Biology II CoverЗагружено:Milka Rahman
- Statistics RevisionЗагружено:iampuneite
- Assignment 08-09-2019Загружено:pyp_pyp
- Statistics for Managers Syllabus Sem VII.docxЗагружено:Dhrumi Patel
- García2008 Article AStudyOnTheUseOfNon-parametricЗагружено:Gaurav Adakmol

- DA3812 How to Pass the FRM Exam eBookЗагружено:Gaurav
- IBCHAP 9 (Additional Notes)Загружено:TC
- Career_Paths_Banking_SB.pdfЗагружено:Alejandro Gonzalez
- NEC3 (5 Payment)Загружено:jasminetso
- Fabozzi Fofmi4 Ch28 ImЗагружено:Andreea Conoro
- Ch 3Загружено:m7taref
- CHAPTER 4 Interst and Equivalent.pptЗагружено:Cik Minn
- Hull_OFOD9e_MultipleChoice_Questions_and_Answers_Ch07.docЗагружено:guystuff1234
- CAIA Sample Questions & ExercisesЗагружено:Erik Spangberg
- Emi CalculatorЗагружено:Harpreet Singh
- Richard Dennis and Sonterra v ANZ and others gov.uscourts.nysd.461685.1.0Загружено:Maverick Minitries
- Chap023 Text Bank(1) SolutionЗагружено:Prabhpuneet Pandher
- MATHEMATICSЗагружено:Leandro Baldicañas Piczon
- Yield Curve ConstructionЗагружено:apsjainshanta
- Chapter10 SolutionsЗагружено:Abdulrahman Khelef
- Estimating Inputs for ValuationЗагружено:Avinash Kharde
- 05 Lecture - the time value of money.pdfЗагружено:jgutierrez_castro7724
- Time Value of MoneyЗагружено:sudeepshaw
- Vasicek PrintЗагружено:KiềuTuyến
- Current Affairs 1st Jul- 2013 18th AugЗагружено:Gangadri524
- Bhu Mba 2v Financial Management NotesЗагружено:Jayanth Samavedam
- Chartbook in Gold We Trust 2018Загружено:Turd Ferguson
- Excel Notes 2Загружено:Sanket Gangal
- capm notesЗагружено:Thakur Raj Anand
- -t8. Money Growth and InflationЗагружено:mimi96
- Topic 3_Intl Parity Conditions and Forecasting Exchange RatesЗагружено:Miruna Iulia
- ZCYCЗагружено:Sharvari Khandeparkar
- ps1Загружено:zooi2301
- Students Engineering Economy (2)Загружено:Alyssa Apolinario
- Stochastic Processes Toolkit for Risk ManagementЗагружено:Mariana Gomes