对本文的总体评价为：（1-5分，5分最高）

可参考以下标准：

• 5分：佳作、开创性成果
• 4分：合格的优秀论文、可直接接收发表
• 3分：小改（Minor）后可接收
• 2分：需要大改（Major）
• 1分：价值有限，即使修改后亦不能发表
• 0分：本wiki不收录0分的论文。。。

有必要时，可以在文中任何地方插入你的签名。

Forecasting the Equity Risk Premium: The Role of Technical Indicators

1. Christopher J. Neely
2. David E. Rapach
3. Jun Tu
4. Guofu Zhou

2014

Academic research relies extensively on macroeconomic variables to forecast the U.S. equity risk premium, with relatively little attention paid to the technical indicators widely employed by practitioners. Our paper fills this gap by comparing the predictive ability of technical indicators with that of macroeconomic variables. Technical indicators display statistically and economically significant in-sample and out-of-sample predictive power, matching or exceeding that of macroeconomic variables. Furthermore, technical indicators and macroeconomic variables provide complementary information over the business cycle: technical indicators better detect the typical decline in the equity risk premium near business-cycle peaks, whereas macroeconomic variables more readily pick up the typical rise in the equity risk premium near cyclical troughs. Consistent with this behavior, we show that combining information from both technical indicators and macroeconomic variables significantly improves equity risk premium forecasts versus using either type of information alone. Overall, the substantial countercyclical fluctuations in the equity risk premium appear well captured by the combined information in technical indicators and macroeconomic variables.

Neely, Christopher J., David E. Rapach, Jun Tu, and Guofu Zhou. “Forecasting the equity risk premium: the role of technical indicators.” Management science 60, no. 7 (2014): 1772-1791.

1. https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1838
2. https://eyun.baidu.com/s/3qZMVi2o

1. 论文是关于什么的？[请提供该论文的简要摘要。]

2. 这篇论文的长处和短处是什么？[请以以下角度评述：（a）创新（研究问题、建模、方法等）；（b）相关性（研究问题、发现等）；（c）严谨性（适当的方法、分析的正确性等）]

研究问题、建模、方法等

研究问题、发现

适当的方法、分析的正确性等

3.如果有的话，潜在改进的主要地方是什么？[如果这些关键要求和建议能够被适当处理，请重点关注能使文章发表的关键要求和建议。如果你看到不可逾越的障碍，请清楚地描述你的担忧。如果能为编辑和作者提供具体有建设性的意见最好不过了，并在可能的情况下，提出可行的建议。同样，应避免含糊不清和/或含糊不清的批评。]

4.如果有的话，潜在改进的微小地方是什么？[再次，请具体说明。]

5.有没有机会做一项新的研究？