05299oam 22011054 450 991078834680332120230721045616.01-4623-9311-X1-4527-7328-91-4518-7179-11-282-84254-49786612842542(CKB)3170000000055207(EBL)1608187(SSID)ssj0000940757(PQKBManifestationID)11492017(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000940757(PQKBWorkID)10955942(PQKB)11670850(MiAaPQ)EBC1608187(MiAaPQ)EBC3013326(Au-PeEL)EBL1608187(OCoLC)870245358(IMF)WPIEE2009032(EXLCZ)99317000000005520720020129d2009 uf 0engur|n|---|||||txtccrEvaluating Historical CGER Assessments : How Well Have They Predicted Subsequent Exchange Rate Movements? /Jungjin Lee, Abdul Abiad, Prakash KannanWashington, D.C. :International Monetary Fund,2009.1 online resource (29 p.)IMF Working PapersDescription based upon print version of record.1-4519-1615-9 Contents; I. Introduction; Box; 1. An Overview of CGER Exchange Rate Assessment Methodologies; II. Evaluating Misalignment Assessments for Advanced Economies; A. Mean Prediction Error; Figures; 1. Mean Prediction Error; B. Panel Regressions; Tables; 1. Panel Regression Results using Midpoint of CGER Assessment; 2. Panel Regression Results using MB Misalignment Estimate; C. Individual Country Diagnostics; 3. Evaluation Diagnostics using MB Estimates; 2. Scatterplots of Realized vs. Predicted Changes in REER; D. Evaluating Current Account Movements; 4. Panel Regression Results using CA NormIII. Cross-Section Analysis of the Fall 2006 CGER Estimates5. Country Coverage of the Expanded CGER Exercise.; 3. Undconditional Scatterplots, 27 CGER Countries; 6. Regression Results using Midpoint of CGER Assessment; 4. Conditional Scatterplots using Midpoint of CGER Assessment; 7. Regression Results using Individual CGER Methodologies; IV. Conclusion; 8. Regression Results using Midpoint of CGER Assessment, Different Horizons.......; References; Appendices; 1. Pooled Regression Results; 2. Description of Diagnostic Statistics.; 3. Data AppendixThe IMF's Consultative Group on Exchange Rate issues (CGER) has been conducting exchange rate assessments as part of the surveillance process since 1997. This paper evaluates CGER assessments from 1997 to 2006, by comparing these to subsequent movements in real effective exchange rates (REER). We find that CGER's estimated misalignments have predictive power over future REER movements, especially over longer horizons and after changes in fundamentals are accounted for. But while CGER misalignments frequently predict the direction of currency movements correctly, misalignments have tended to be persistent, resulting in systematic errors-overprediction for undervalued currencies and underprediction for overvalued currencies.IMF Working Papers; Working Paper ;No. 2009/032Foreign exchange rates -- Mathematical modelsForeign exchangeMonetary policy -- Mathematical modelsFinanceHILCCBusiness & EconomicsHILCCInternational FinanceHILCCForeign ExchangeimfMoney and Monetary PolicyimfMonetary SystemsimfStandardsimfRegimesimfGovernment and the Monetary SystemimfPayment SystemsimfCurrencyimfForeign exchangeimfMonetary economicsimfReal exchange ratesimfExchange ratesimfReal effective exchange ratesimfCurrenciesimfExchange rate assessmentsimfMoneyimfUnited StatesimfForeign exchange rates -- Mathematical models.Foreign exchange.Monetary policy -- Mathematical models.FinanceBusiness & EconomicsInternational FinanceForeign ExchangeMoney and Monetary PolicyMonetary SystemsStandardsRegimesGovernment and the Monetary SystemPayment SystemsCurrencyForeign exchangeMonetary economicsReal exchange ratesExchange ratesReal effective exchange ratesCurrenciesExchange rate assessmentsMoney339.267Lee Jungjin1493516Abiad Abdul1493465Kannan Prakash1493479DcWaIMFBOOK9910788346803321Evaluating Historical CGER Assessments3716519UNINA