Finance and Economics Discussion Series (FEDS)
September 2025
Virtue or Mirage? Complexity in Exchange Rate Prediction
Abstract:
This paper investigates whether the “virtue of complexity” (VoC), documented in equity return prediction, extends to exchange rate forecasting. Using nonlinear Ridge regressions with Random Fourier Features (Ridge–RFF), we compare the predictive performance of complex models against linear regression and the robust random walk benchmark. Forecasts are constructed across three sets of economic fundamentals—traditional monetary, expanded monetary and non-monetary, and Taylor-rule predictors—with nominal complexity varied through rolling training windows of 12, 60, and 120 months. Our results offer a cautionary perspective. Complexity delivers only modest, localized gains: in very small samples with rich predictor sets, Ridge–RFF can outperform linear regression. Yet these improvements never translate into systematic gains over the random walk. As training windows expand, Ridge–RFF quickly loses ground, while linear regression increasingly dominates, at times even surpassing the random walk under expanded fundamentals. Market-timing analyses reinforce these findings: complexity-based strategies yield occasional short-sample gains but are unstable and prone to sharp drawdowns, whereas simpler linear and random walk strategies provide more robust and consistent economic value. By incorporating formal forecast evaluation tests—including Clark–West and Diebold–Mariano—we show that apparent gains from complexity are fragile and rarely statistically significant. Overall, our evidence points to a limited virtue of complexity in FX forecasting: complexity may help under narrowly defined conditions, but parsimony and the random walk benchmark remain more reliable across samples, predictor sets, and economic evaluations.
Keywords: Foreign exchange rate, Exchange rate disconnect puzzle, predictability, complexity, machine learning, Ridge, RFF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2025.089
PDF: Full Paper
Disclaimer: The economic research that is linked from this page represents the views of the authors and does not indicate concurrence either by other members of the Board's staff or by the Board of Governors. The economic research and their conclusions are often preliminary and are circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. The Board values having a staff that conducts research on a wide range of economic topics and that explores a diverse array of perspectives on those topics. The resulting conversations in academia, the economic policy community, and the broader public are important to sharpening our collective thinking.