Does the option market produce superior forecasts of noise-corrected volatility measures?

This paper assesses the robustness of the relative performance of spot- and options-based volatility forecasts to the treatment of microstructure noise. Robustness of the results to the method of constructing option-implied forecasts is also investigated. Using a test for superior predictive ability, model-free implied volatility, which exploits information in the volatility 'smile', and at-the-money implied volatility, which does not, are both tested as benchmark forecasts of a range of alternative volatility proxies. The results provide compelling evidence against the model-free forecast for three Dow Jones Industrial Average stocks, over a 2001-2006 evaluation period. In contrast, the at-the-money implied volatility forecast is given strong support for the three equities over this period. Neither benchmark is supported for the S&P500 index. Importantly, the main qualitative results are invariant to the method of noise correction used in measuring future volatility. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.