Evaluating Forecasts at Multiple Horizons: An Extension of the Diebold–Mariano Approach

ABSTRACT Forecast accuracy tests are fundamental tools for comparing competing predictive models. The widely used Diebold–Mariano (DM) test assesses whether differences in forecast errors are statistically significant. However, its standard form is limited to pairwise comparisons at a single forecast horizon. A number of solutions to this exist in the literature. Relative to these, this paper, based on a Mahalanobis approach, rather than approaches based on asymptotic normality. Our method incorporates cross‐covariances between errors and generalizes the DM framework to account for overlapping forecast windows and autocorrelation. The test provides a transparent alternative for forecasters and practitioners needing unified inference across temporal spans. We use simulations to assess conditions under which our test performs well, showing promising results in situations where big data are likely to be applicable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Forecasting
Published
2026-03-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/for.70150
Primary Topic
Forecasting Techniques and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating Forecasts at Multiple Horizons: An Extension of the Diebold–Mariano Approach

Andrew Grant, Steve Satchell, Matus Mrazik
Journal of Forecasting
Forecasting Techniques and Applications
article

Evaluating Forecasts at Multiple Horizons: An Extension of the Diebold–Mariano Approach

Andrew Grant, Steve Satchell, Matus Mrazik
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Forecast accuracy tests are fundamental tools for comparing competing predictive models. The widely used Diebold–Mariano (DM) test assesses whether differences in forecast errors are statistically significant. However, its standard form is limited to pairwise comparisons at a single forecast horizon. A number of solutions to this exist in the literature. Relative to these, this paper, based on a Mahalanobis approach, rather than approaches based on asymptotic normality. Our method incorporates cross‐covariances between errors and generalizes the DM framework to account for overlapping forecast windows and autocorrelation. The test provides a transparent alternative for forecasters and practitioners needing unified inference across temporal spans. We use simulations to assess conditions under which our test performs well, showing promising results in situations where big data are likely to be applicable.

Journal of Forecasting
The University of Sydney (AU), Trinity College (CA), Jupiter Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Forecasting Techniques and Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.