2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2016.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The role of spatial and temporal structure for residential rent predictions

Abstract: This paper examines the predictive power of five linear hedonic pricing models for the residential market with varying levels of complexity in their spatial and temporal structures. Unlike similar studies, we extend the out-of-sample forecast evaluation to one-day-ahead predictions with a rolling estimation window, which is a reasonable setting for many practical applications. We show that the in-sample fit and cross-validation prediction accuracy improve significantly when we account for spatial heterogeneity… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
21
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For comparison, if the listing price and the out of sample predictions from the PBA model here are logged then the r 2 increases from 0.50 to 0.76, still below Chung’s 0.98 value. Other reported r 2 on the log scale are 0.329 and 0.315 in Appendix A of Banzhaf and Farooque [22]; 0.854 and 0.856 in Table 6 of Löchl [59]; Fuss and Koller [25] quote 0.883 (Table 3, STAR model), finally Baron and Kaplan [26] report 0.753 in Table 3. On the untransformed scale, Prunty [29] reports R 2 of 0.19 for his California model and 0.13 for his New York model, Table 11; much higher R 2 values of 0.607 and 0.622 are reported by McCord, Davis [30] in Table V. Clearly, even in this limited number of studies the range of R 2 values is wide but these results sit comfortably within this range.…”
Section: Discussion and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For comparison, if the listing price and the out of sample predictions from the PBA model here are logged then the r 2 increases from 0.50 to 0.76, still below Chung’s 0.98 value. Other reported r 2 on the log scale are 0.329 and 0.315 in Appendix A of Banzhaf and Farooque [22]; 0.854 and 0.856 in Table 6 of Löchl [59]; Fuss and Koller [25] quote 0.883 (Table 3, STAR model), finally Baron and Kaplan [26] report 0.753 in Table 3. On the untransformed scale, Prunty [29] reports R 2 of 0.19 for his California model and 0.13 for his New York model, Table 11; much higher R 2 values of 0.607 and 0.622 are reported by McCord, Davis [30] in Table V. Clearly, even in this limited number of studies the range of R 2 values is wide but these results sit comfortably within this range.…”
Section: Discussion and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firstly there are thresholds to set for how far and how long ago rental listings should be used. Fuss and Koller [25] experiment with time windows of 400, 500 and 600 days and whilst there are differences in their model RMSEs, they are not great. Similar experiments with distance lags also suggest that their spatial models are largely invariant to these choices.…”
Section: Case Descriptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Spatial heterogeneity in hedonic pricing models has at least two different aspects. First, the heterogeneous structure of residuals leads to inconsistent estimates of pricing coefficients (see, e.g., Füss and Koller (2016)). Second, the residuals can be regarded as the price of unobserved property factors.…”
Section: Estimation Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, a number of automated systems are presented in the professional literature [6][7][8]. In most cases, however, these are systems for valuing apartments [9,10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%