Comparative performance of stochastic and deep learning models in forecasting crude oil prices under market shocks

IF 4.9 2区 工程技术 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Computers & Chemical Engineering Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-12-19 DOI:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2025.109534
Busra Agan Celik, Murat Yulek, Serdar Celik
{"title":"Comparative performance of stochastic and deep learning models in forecasting crude oil prices under market shocks","authors":"Busra Agan Celik,&nbsp;Murat Yulek,&nbsp;Serdar Celik","doi":"10.1016/j.compchemeng.2025.109534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of crude oil price forecasting by systematically comparing stochastic models (GBM, FBM, BB), machine learning and time-series approaches (LSTM, ARIMA, VAR), and two hybrid strategies LSTM-GBM (time-varying drift estimation) and Bridge-ARIMA (terminal-level anchoring) across short-, medium-, and long-term horizons. Using daily price data spanning 34 years (1990–2024), the analysis encompasses major global crises, including the Asian Financial Crisis, Dot-com Bubble, Global Commodity Boom, Global Financial Crisis, Arab Spring, Oil Price Collapse, COVID-19 pandemic, and the Russia–Ukraine conflict. Stochastic models exhibited sensitivity to the number of simulation runs, with FBM yielding the most robust forecasts, BB demonstrating stability through mean-reversion, and GBM showing larger errors over extended horizons. LSTM consistently outperformed alternative methods, capturing nonlinear dynamics and long-term dependencies with high accuracy across all horizons. ARIMA performed adequately for short-term forecasts but declined over longer periods, whereas VAR consistently underperformed, reflecting its limited capacity to capture complex market dynamics. The hybrid methods further enhance performance: Bridge-ARIMA reduces bias by aligning simulated paths with an ARIMA-implied terminal, improving crisis-period tracking, whereas LSTM-GBM leverages learned drift to refine path forecasts and risk metrics (e.g., VaR). These results underscore the complementary advantages of stochastic and deep learning approaches and suggest that hybrid frameworks can enhance both volatility assessment and trend prediction. The findings offer practical insights for energy market planning, risk management, and strategic investment, particularly under crisis-driven volatility.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":286,"journal":{"name":"Computers & Chemical Engineering","volume":"206 ","pages":"Article 109534"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers & Chemical Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009813542500537X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of crude oil price forecasting by systematically comparing stochastic models (GBM, FBM, BB), machine learning and time-series approaches (LSTM, ARIMA, VAR), and two hybrid strategies LSTM-GBM (time-varying drift estimation) and Bridge-ARIMA (terminal-level anchoring) across short-, medium-, and long-term horizons. Using daily price data spanning 34 years (1990–2024), the analysis encompasses major global crises, including the Asian Financial Crisis, Dot-com Bubble, Global Commodity Boom, Global Financial Crisis, Arab Spring, Oil Price Collapse, COVID-19 pandemic, and the Russia–Ukraine conflict. Stochastic models exhibited sensitivity to the number of simulation runs, with FBM yielding the most robust forecasts, BB demonstrating stability through mean-reversion, and GBM showing larger errors over extended horizons. LSTM consistently outperformed alternative methods, capturing nonlinear dynamics and long-term dependencies with high accuracy across all horizons. ARIMA performed adequately for short-term forecasts but declined over longer periods, whereas VAR consistently underperformed, reflecting its limited capacity to capture complex market dynamics. The hybrid methods further enhance performance: Bridge-ARIMA reduces bias by aligning simulated paths with an ARIMA-implied terminal, improving crisis-period tracking, whereas LSTM-GBM leverages learned drift to refine path forecasts and risk metrics (e.g., VaR). These results underscore the complementary advantages of stochastic and deep learning approaches and suggest that hybrid frameworks can enhance both volatility assessment and trend prediction. The findings offer practical insights for energy market planning, risk management, and strategic investment, particularly under crisis-driven volatility.
随机和深度学习模型在市场冲击下原油价格预测中的比较性能
本研究通过系统地比较随机模型(GBM、FBM、BB)、机器学习和时间序列方法(LSTM、ARIMA、VAR),以及两种混合策略LSTM-GBM(时变漂移估计)和Bridge-ARIMA(终端级锚定),对原油价格预测进行了全面评估。该报告利用34年(1990年至2024年)的每日价格数据,分析了亚洲金融危机、互联网泡沫、全球大宗商品繁荣、全球金融危机、阿拉伯之春、油价暴跌、COVID-19大流行、俄乌冲突等重大全球危机。随机模型显示出对模拟运行次数的敏感性,其中FBM产生最稳健的预测,BB通过均值回归显示出稳定性,而GBM在较长时间内显示出较大的误差。LSTM始终优于其他方法,在所有视界以高精度捕获非线性动态和长期依赖关系。ARIMA在短期预测中表现良好,但在长期预测中表现下降,而VAR的表现一直不佳,反映出其捕捉复杂市场动态的能力有限。混合方法进一步提高了性能:Bridge-ARIMA通过将模拟路径与arima隐含的终端对齐来减少偏差,改善危机期跟踪,而LSTM-GBM利用学习漂移来优化路径预测和风险指标(如VaR)。这些结果强调了随机和深度学习方法的互补优势,并表明混合框架可以增强波动性评估和趋势预测。研究结果为能源市场规划、风险管理和战略投资提供了实用的见解,特别是在危机驱动的波动下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Computers & Chemical Engineering
Computers & Chemical Engineering 工程技术-工程:化工
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
14.00%
发文量
374
审稿时长
70 days
期刊介绍: Computers & Chemical Engineering is primarily a journal of record for new developments in the application of computing and systems technology to chemical engineering problems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书