Introduction to mhpfilter

The hardware and bandwidth for this mirror is donated by dogado GmbH, the Webhosting and Full Service-Cloud Provider. Check out our Wordpress Tutorial.
If you wish to report a bug, or if you are interested in having us mirror your free-software or open-source project, please feel free to contact us at mirror[@]dogado.de.

Muhammad Yaseen

Javed Iqbal

M. Nadim Hanif

2026-02-10

1 Overview

The mhpfilter package provides a fast, efficient implementation of the Modified Hodrick-Prescott (HP) filter for decomposing time series into trend and cyclical components. The key innovation is automatic optimal selection of the smoothing parameter λ using generalized cross-validation (GCV), based on the methodology of Choudhary, Hanif & Iqbal (2014).

1.1 Why Modified HP Filter?

The standard HP filter uses fixed λ values:

λ = 1600 for quarterly data
λ = 100 for annual data
λ = 14400 for monthly data

However, these values were calibrated for U.S. quarterly GDP in the 1990s. They may not be appropriate for:

Different countries (emerging markets vs developed economies)
Different variables (investment is more volatile than consumption)
Different time periods (pre/post Great Moderation)

The Modified HP filter solves this by estimating the optimal λ from the data itself using the GCV criterion:

\[\text{GCV}(\lambda) = T^{-1} \left(1 + \frac{2T}{\lambda}\right) \sum_{t=1}^{T}(y_t - g_t)^2\]

where \(g_t\) is the estimated trend for a given \(\lambda\), and \(T\) is the number of observations.

2 Installation

# Install from GitHub
devtools::install_github("myaseen208/mhpfilter")

3 Quick Start

library(mhpfilter)
library(data.table)
library(ggplot2)

3.1 Example 1: GDP-like Series

Let’s start with a simulated series that resembles real GDP data:

set.seed(2024)
n <- 120  # 30 years of quarterly data

# Generate components
trend_growth <- 0.005  # 0.5% quarterly growth
trend <- cumsum(c(100, rnorm(n - 1, mean = trend_growth, sd = 0.002)))

# Business cycle: AR(2) process
cycle <- arima.sim(list(ar = c(1.3, -0.5)), n, sd = 2)

# Observed GDP (in logs)
gdp <- trend + cycle

# Apply Modified HP filter
result <- mhp_filter(gdp, max_lambda = 10000)
cat("Optimal lambda:", get_lambda(result), "\n")
#> Optimal lambda: 4337
cat("GCV value:", format(get_gcv(result), digits = 4), "\n")
#> GCV value: 14.36

3.2 Visualization with autoplot

result_obj <- mhp_filter(gdp, max_lambda = 10000, as_dt = FALSE)
autoplot(result_obj) +
  labs(
    title = "Modified HP Filter Decomposition of Simulated GDP",
    subtitle = paste0("Optimal λ = ", get_lambda(result_obj))
  ) +
  theme_minimal(base_size = 11) +
  theme(
    plot.title = element_text(face = "bold", size = 13),
    plot.subtitle = element_text(color = "gray40"),
    legend.position = "bottom"
  )

Figure 1: Modified HP Filter Decomposition

4 Comparison with Standard HP Filter

One of the key features of mhpfilter is the ability to compare results with the standard HP filter:

4.1 Example 2: Why Fixed Lambda Matters

# Apply both filters
mhp_res <- mhp_filter(gdp, max_lambda = 10000)
hp_res <- hp_filter(gdp, lambda = 1600)

# Extract key statistics
comp <- mhp_compare(gdp, frequency = "quarterly", max_lambda = 10000)
print(comp)
#>         method lambda cycle_sd    cycle_mean       ar1 cycle_range      gcv
#>         <char>  <num>    <num>         <num>     <num>       <num>    <num>
#> 1:          HP   1600 3.572060  3.114072e-12 0.7922935    18.43100       NA
#> 2: Modified HP   4337 3.704804 -1.247583e-11 0.8040480    19.11926 14.36441

4.2 Visual Comparison

plot_comparison(gdp, frequency = "quarterly", max_lambda = 10000, show_cycle = TRUE) +
  theme_minimal(base_size = 11) +
  theme(
    plot.title = element_text(face = "bold", size = 13),
    legend.position = "bottom",
    legend.box = "vertical"
  )

Figure 2: HP vs Modified HP Filter Comparison

4.3 Key Insights from Comparison

The comparison reveals important differences:

# Optimal lambda from MHP
opt_lambda <- get_lambda(mhp_res)
cat("Optimal λ (Modified HP):", opt_lambda, "\n")
#> Optimal λ (Modified HP): 4337
cat("Fixed λ (Standard HP):  1600\n\n")
#> Fixed λ (Standard HP):  1600

# Cyclical volatility
sd_mhp <- sd(mhp_res$cycle)
sd_hp <- sd(hp_res$cycle)
cat("Cycle SD (Modified HP):", round(sd_mhp, 3), "\n")
#> Cycle SD (Modified HP): 3.705
cat("Cycle SD (Standard HP):", round(sd_hp, 3), "\n")
#> Cycle SD (Standard HP): 3.572
cat("Difference:", round(sd_mhp - sd_hp, 3), 
    paste0("(", round(100 * (sd_mhp - sd_hp) / sd_hp, 1), "%)"), "\n")
#> Difference: 0.133 (3.7%)

5 Batch Processing: Multi-Country Analysis

A powerful feature is batch processing multiple series simultaneously. This is particularly useful for cross-country macroeconomic comparisons.

5.1 Example 3: Cross-Country GDP Comparison

set.seed(456)
n_time <- 100  # 25 years quarterly

# Simulate GDP for multiple countries with different characteristics
countries <- c("USA", "Germany", "Japan", "China", "Brazil", "India")
characteristics <- data.table(
  country = countries,
  trend_growth = c(0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 1.5, 0.6, 1.2),  # % quarterly
  trend_vol = c(0.2, 0.15, 0.15, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6),
  cycle_vol = c(1.5, 1.2, 1.0, 2.5, 3.0, 2.0),
  cycle_ar = c(0.85, 0.88, 0.90, 0.75, 0.70, 0.75)
)

# Generate data
gdp_data <- sapply(1:nrow(characteristics), function(i) {
  char <- characteristics[i, ]
  trend <- 100 + cumsum(rnorm(n_time, 
                               mean = char$trend_growth / 100, 
                               sd = char$trend_vol / 100))
  cycle <- arima.sim(list(ar = char$cycle_ar), n_time, sd = char$cycle_vol)
  trend + cycle
})
colnames(gdp_data) <- countries

# Apply Modified HP filter to all countries
batch_result <- mhp_batch(gdp_data, max_lambda = 10000)

# View optimal lambdas
lambdas_table <- attr(batch_result, "lambdas")
print(lambdas_table)
#>     series lambda      gcv
#>     <char>  <int>    <num>
#> 1:     USA    566 3.647804
#> 2: Germany    505 3.096862
#> 3:   Japan    389 1.812784
#> 4:   China   1289 7.544833
#> 5:  Brazil   1739 9.723271
#> 6:   India   1464 5.676737

5.2 Visualizing Cross-Country Cycles

plot_batch(batch_result, show = "cycle", facet = TRUE) +
  labs(
    title = "Business Cycle Components: Cross-Country Comparison",
    subtitle = "Modified HP Filter with Country-Specific λ",
    caption = "Note: Each country has its own optimal smoothing parameter"
  ) +
  theme_minimal(base_size = 10) +
  theme(
    plot.title = element_text(face = "bold", size = 12),
    strip.text = element_text(face = "bold", size = 9),
    strip.background = element_rect(fill = "gray95", color = "gray80"),
    panel.spacing = unit(0.8, "lines")
  )

Figure 3: Business Cycles Across Countries

5.3 Highlighting Specific Countries

plot_batch(batch_result, show = "cycle", facet = FALSE, 
           highlight = c("USA", "China", "India")) +
  labs(
    title = "Business Cycles: Advanced vs Emerging Economies",
    subtitle = "USA (developed) vs China & India (emerging markets)",
    color = "Country (λ)"
  ) +
  theme_minimal(base_size = 11) +
  theme(
    plot.title = element_text(face = "bold", size = 12),
    legend.position = "right",
    legend.key.height = unit(0.8, "lines")
  )

Figure 4: Highlighted Comparison

5.4 Batch Comparison with Standard HP

comparison <- batch_compare(gdp_data, frequency = "quarterly", max_lambda = 10000)
print(comparison)
#>     series hp_lambda mhp_lambda hp_cycle_sd mhp_cycle_sd     sd_diff    hp_ar1
#>     <char>     <num>      <int>       <num>        <num>       <num>     <num>
#> 1:     USA      1600        566    1.849002     1.650031 -0.19897143 0.6777133
#> 2: Germany      1600        505    1.728567     1.496906 -0.23166103 0.7346829
#> 3:   Japan      1600        389    1.357226     1.099696 -0.25753039 0.7784002
#> 4:   China      1600       1289    2.606722     2.568540 -0.03818215 0.5954362
#> 5:  Brazil      1600       1739    2.955147     2.967902  0.01275438 0.5726763
#> 6:   India      1600       1464    2.258162     2.246082 -0.01207980 0.5016707
#>      mhp_ar1     ar1_diff relative_sd
#>        <num>        <num>       <num>
#> 1: 0.6111909 -0.066522391   0.8923898
#> 2: 0.6598704 -0.074812412   0.8659809
#> 3: 0.6723097 -0.106090519   0.8102524
#> 4: 0.5828127 -0.012623423   0.9853524
#> 5: 0.5760828  0.003406520   1.0043160
#> 6: 0.4965493 -0.005121396   0.9946506

# Analyze differences
cat("\nSummary of Lambda Differences:\n")
#> 
#> Summary of Lambda Differences:
cat("Mean optimal λ:", round(mean(comparison$lambda), 0), "\n")
#> Mean optimal λ: NA
cat("Fixed λ (HP):  1600\n")
#> Fixed λ (HP):  1600
cat("Range of optimal λ:", paste0("[", min(comparison$lambda), ", ", 
                                   max(comparison$lambda), "]"), "\n\n")
#> Range of optimal λ: [Inf, -Inf]

cat("Countries with λ > 2000:", 
    paste(comparison$series[comparison$lambda > 2000], collapse = ", "), "\n")
#> Countries with λ > 2000:
cat("Countries with λ < 1000:", 
    paste(comparison$series[comparison$lambda < 1000], collapse = ", "), "\n")
#> Countries with λ < 1000:

6 Example 4: Real Business Cycle Analysis

Demonstrating how the Modified HP filter affects business cycle statistics:

# Focus on one country for detailed analysis
usa_gdp <- gdp_data[, "USA"]
usa_mhp <- mhp_filter(usa_gdp, max_lambda = 10000, as_dt = FALSE)
usa_hp <- hp_filter(usa_gdp, lambda = 1600, as_dt = FALSE)

# Create comparison data.table
bc_stats <- data.table(
  Method = c("Modified HP", "Standard HP"),
  Lambda = c(usa_mhp$lambda, 1600),
  `Mean Cycle` = c(mean(usa_mhp$cycle), mean(usa_hp$cycle)),
  `SD Cycle` = c(sd(usa_mhp$cycle), sd(usa_hp$cycle)),
  `Min Cycle` = c(min(usa_mhp$cycle), min(usa_hp$cycle)),
  `Max Cycle` = c(max(usa_mhp$cycle), max(usa_hp$cycle)),
  `AR(1) Coef` = c(
    cor(usa_mhp$cycle[-1], usa_mhp$cycle[-length(usa_mhp$cycle)]),
    cor(usa_hp$cycle[-1], usa_hp$cycle[-length(usa_hp$cycle)])
  )
)

print(bc_stats)
#>         Method Lambda    Mean Cycle SD Cycle Min Cycle Max Cycle AR(1) Coef
#>         <char>  <num>         <num>    <num>     <num>     <num>      <num>
#> 1: Modified HP    566 -6.454571e-13 1.650031 -4.132040  3.671701   0.613421
#> 2: Standard HP   1600  5.820198e-12 1.849002 -4.743509  3.497196   0.683282

6.1 Cyclical Properties Visualization

# Create data for plotting
plot_data <- data.table(
  Time = rep(1:n_time, 2),
  Cycle = c(usa_mhp$cycle, usa_hp$cycle),
  Method = rep(c("Modified HP", "Standard HP"), each = n_time),
  Lambda = rep(c(paste0("λ = ", usa_mhp$lambda), "λ = 1600"), each = n_time)
)

ggplot(plot_data, aes(x = Time, y = Cycle, color = Method, linetype = Method)) +
  geom_hline(yintercept = 0, linetype = "dashed", color = "gray60", linewidth = 0.5) +
  geom_line(linewidth = 0.8) +
  scale_color_manual(values = c("Modified HP" = "#0072B2", "Standard HP" = "#D55E00")) +
  scale_linetype_manual(values = c("Modified HP" = "solid", "Standard HP" = "dashed")) +
  labs(
    title = "Business Cycle Components: Method Comparison",
    subtitle = "Modified HP filter allows for data-driven smoothing",
    x = "Time Period (Quarters)",
    y = "Cyclical Component",
    color = NULL,
    linetype = NULL
  ) +
  theme_minimal(base_size = 11) +
  theme(
    plot.title = element_text(face = "bold", size = 12),
    legend.position = "bottom",
    panel.grid.minor = element_blank()
  )

Figure 5: Cyclical Properties Comparison

7 Example 5: Sensitivity to Lambda

Demonstrating why optimal lambda selection matters:

# Try different lambda values
lambdas_to_try <- c(100, 400, 1600, 6400, get_lambda(mhp_res))
lambda_results <- lapply(lambdas_to_try, function(lam) {
  res <- hp_filter(gdp, lambda = lam, as_dt = FALSE)
  data.table(
    Time = 1:length(gdp),
    Original = gdp,
    Trend = res$trend,
    Cycle = res$cycle,
    Lambda = paste0("λ = ", lam),
    Is_Optimal = lam == get_lambda(mhp_res)
  )
})
sens_data <- rbindlist(lambda_results)

# Plot trends
ggplot(sens_data, aes(x = Time)) +
  geom_line(aes(y = Original), color = "gray60", linewidth = 0.5, alpha = 0.7) +
  geom_line(aes(y = Trend, color = Is_Optimal), linewidth = 0.9) +
  facet_wrap(~Lambda, ncol = 2) +
  scale_color_manual(values = c("TRUE" = "#D55E00", "FALSE" = "#0072B2"),
                     labels = c("Sub-optimal", "Optimal (MHP)"),
                     name = NULL) +
  labs(
    title = "Effect of Lambda on Trend Estimation",
    subtitle = "Lower λ = less smooth (overfitting), Higher λ = too smooth (underfitting)",
    x = "Time Period",
    y = "Value",
    caption = "Gray line shows original series"
  ) +
  theme_minimal(base_size = 10) +
  theme(
    plot.title = element_text(face = "bold", size = 12),
    strip.text = element_text(face = "bold"),
    strip.background = element_rect(fill = "gray95", color = NA),
    legend.position = "bottom",
    panel.spacing = unit(1, "lines")
  )

Figure 6: Sensitivity to Lambda Choice

8 Performance Tips

8.1 Choosing max_lambda

The max_lambda parameter determines the search range:

# For most macroeconomic applications
result_standard <- mhp_filter(gdp, max_lambda = 10000)
cat("Standard search (max_lambda=10000):\n")
#> Standard search (max_lambda=10000):
cat("  Optimal λ:", get_lambda(result_standard), "\n")
#>   Optimal λ: 4337
cat("  GCV:", format(get_gcv(result_standard), digits = 4), "\n\n")
#>   GCV: 14.36

# For very smooth trends or unusual series
result_extended <- mhp_filter(gdp, max_lambda = 50000)
cat("Extended search (max_lambda=50000):\n")
#> Extended search (max_lambda=50000):
cat("  Optimal λ:", get_lambda(result_extended), "\n")
#>   Optimal λ: 4337
cat("  GCV:", format(get_gcv(result_extended), digits = 4), "\n\n")
#>   GCV: 14.36

# Check if we're near the boundary
if (get_lambda(result_standard) > 0.95 * 10000) {
  cat("WARNING: Optimal λ near upper bound. Consider increasing max_lambda.\n")
}

8.2 Batch Processing Efficiency

# Efficient for multiple series
large_dataset <- matrix(rnorm(100 * 50), nrow = 100, ncol = 50)
system.time(batch_result <- mhp_batch(large_dataset, max_lambda = 5000))

# Less efficient: loop over columns
system.time({
  manual_result <- lapply(1:50, function(i) {
    mhp_filter(large_dataset[, i], max_lambda = 5000)
  })
})

9 Summary and Recommendations

9.1 When to Use Modified HP Filter

✓ Recommended for:

Cross-country macroeconomic comparisons
Analysis of different economic variables (GDP, consumption, investment)
Uncertain about appropriate λ for your context
Need defensible, data-driven parameter selection
Comparing business cycles across countries with different volatility

Standard HP may suffice when:

Replicating published studies using fixed λ
U.S. quarterly GDP analysis matching original HP (1997) context
Speed is critical and λ = 1600 is demonstrably appropriate

9.2 Key Takeaways

Optimal λ varies substantially across countries and variables
Fixed λ may mis-assign variation to trend vs cycle
Modified HP filter provides data-driven selection via GCV
Batch processing enables efficient multi-series analysis
Visualization tools help understand differences between methods

10 References

Choudhary, M.A., Hanif, M.N., & Iqbal, J. (2014). On smoothing macroeconomic time series using the modified HP filter. Applied Economics, 46(19), 2205-2214. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2014.896982
Hodrick, R.J., & Prescott, E.C. (1997). Postwar US business cycles: An empirical investigation. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 29(1), 1-16.
McDermott, C.J. (1997). An automatic method for choosing the smoothing parameter in the HP filter. Unpublished manuscript, International Monetary Fund.
Ravn, M.O., & Uhlig, H. (2002). On adjusting the Hodrick-Prescott filter for the frequency of observations. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(2), 371-376.

11 See Also

vignette("methodology", package = "mhpfilter") - Detailed mathematical theory
?mhp_filter - Main filtering function
?mhp_batch - Batch processing
?mhp_compare - Comparison tools

These binaries (installable software) and packages are in development.
They may not be fully stable and should be used with caution. We make no claims about them.
Health stats visible at Monitor.