cs.LGJun 29, 2026

Heads, Not Backbones: Output Heads Dominate Architectures on Fat-Tailed Returns

Authors: Sichao He, Yansong Zhang

Organizations: Peking University · Academy for Advanced Interdisciplinary Studies · Beijing, China · Yeshine Interactive HK Technology Limited · Hong Kong, China

Abstract

In a deep forecasting pipeline for fat-tailed financial returns at short horizons, which matters more - the backbone architecture or the output head? We compare four modern backbones (TimesNet, DLinear, N-BEATS, iTransformer) under three output heads: a point head, a single-Gaussian density head, and a Gaussian mixture density head with K=4 components. On S and P 500 monthly log-returns (1871-2023) under anchored walk-forward validation, the three heads form a strict gradient: switching from point to Gaussian improves CRPS by about 1.3 percent; switching from Gaussian to mixture adds a further about 2.4 percent. Switching between backbones, in contrast, changes CRPS by less than 1.5 percent on the point-head row and on the backbone-mean axis; density-head backbone spread is larger (up to 5.1 percent on the h=1 Gaussian row, driven by N-BEATS) but the head gradient (3.7 percentage points) still dominates. The Model Confidence Set on squared errors does not exclude any of the 12 variants at the 5 percent level: the head separates them only on distributional metrics (CRPS, pinball, coverage), not on squared error. The mixture head incremental value over a single Gaussian is largest in the highest-volatility regimes (13.9 percent in 1970s stagflation at h=12), confirming the mixture captures tail risk beyond what a unimodal Gaussian can express. The picture is horizon-dependent: the head dominates at short horizons, but at long horizons (h >= 6) the backbone re-takes the lead - an h-split we document against classical baselines (section 5.1). We conclude that on fat-tailed returns at short horizons, the head dominates the backbone, and the mixture distribution adds genuine value over a single Gaussian during crisis periods when risk-management decisions actually matter.

Explore similar work

Jun 2, 2026q-fin.CP

FinStressTS: A Parametric Synthetic Benchmark for Time-Series Forecasting in Finance

Financial forecasting is difficult due to low signal-to-noise ratios, latent factors, heavy tails, regime shifts, and jumps. Real-world benchmarks offer limited failure attribution: researchers can observe underperformance, but often cannot isolate why because mechanisms are unobservable and entangled. Real financial data reveal only one realized path, making it difficult to assess tail-risk calibration or data efficiency. We introduce FinStressTS, a mechanism-aware synthetic benchmark that links model behavior to controlled structural causes. FinStressTS comprises 30 diagnostic environments around six mechanism families: volatility clustering, multi-scale persistence, heavy-tailed shocks, regime switching, self-exciting jumps, and zero-inflated processes. We evaluate two tasks: point forecasting, using NMAE across five settings, and probabilistic forecasting, using CRPS under known data-generating mechanisms. We benchmark 15 models, from classical methods (HAR, VAR) to Transformer forecasters (PatchTST, iTransformer) and deep probabilistic architectures (DeepAR, TSFlow), and use learning curves to measure sample efficiency. Our evaluation reveals three insights. First, performance is mechanism-dependent: autoregressive and linear models are highly competitive, and often outperform Transformer-based models, in several volatility-, tail-, and jump-driven environments. Second, distributional alignment matters: parametric probabilistic models such as DeepAR calibrate well in stationary settings, while flexible models can help when distributions become multimodal or sparse. Third, neural models often require more data to match simple baselines, with larger gains mainly when learning latent regimes or complex distributions. FinStressTS provides an open framework for diagnosing failure modes and advancing risk-aware forecasting.
Jiaze Sun, Kelvin J. L. Koa, Ruiyang Ni +3
Jun 3, 2026stat.ML

ReSGA: A Large Tail Risk Model for Learning Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall

Learning Value-at-Risk (VaR) and Expected Shortfall (ES) is important for managing financial risks effectively. Existing approaches with limited parameters are vulnerable to model misspecification in the era of big data. To address this limitation, we propose a large tail risk model, the retrieval-enhanced self-grouping autoencoder (ReSGA), which is designed with millions of parameters to exploit the rich cross-sectional dependence and long-term temporal dynamics of assets using their characteristics. Applied to monthly US equity returns from 1926 to 2023 with 153 firm characteristics, ReSGA outperforms twelve econometric and machine learning competitors in terms of out-of-sample loss and statistical backtesting. In addition, its forecast advantages can translate into significant economic gains from long-short decile portfolios that are constructed by a new size-enhanced left-side momentum strategy. To clarify the role of complexity, we further conduct a systematic scaling analysis and demonstrate that improvements in joint VaR-ES forecasting are primarily driven by data complexity rather than model complexity. Finally, our analyses of group-importance and transfer-learning exhibit the interpretability and cross-market generalizability of ReSGA.
Yichi Zhang, Ke Zhu, Zhoufan Zhu
Jun 26, 2026cs.LG

Deployment-Side Adaptiveness in Multi-Horizon Volatility Forecasting

In financial forecasting, predictive performance depends not only on which model is trained, but also on how the trained model is deployed. We study this issue in multi-horizon volatility forecasting. Our starting point is that a trained multi-output (MIMO) forecaster does not define a single deployable predictor: by changing the inference-time rollout rule, the same trained model induces a family of forecasts with different accuracy and cost profiles. Across 20 stock-volatility series, three forecast horizons, and architectures ranging from linear models to PatchTST, we find that non-default rollout rules often improve over standard MIMO deployment. However, the best fixed rule varies substantially across architectures and horizons, making any single static replacement unreliable. We therefore evaluate validation-based deployment policies over the induced rule family. Under the primary MSE objective, validation-selected singletons provide a low-cost improvement over default MIMO, while small rule subsets recover much of the benefit of larger ensembles at substantially lower inference cost. We also find that policy rankings are metric-sensitive: MSE-selected policies do not transfer uniformly to QLIKE, a finance-standard volatility loss. These results show that inference-time deployment is a meaningful source of adaptiveness in financial forecasting, and that trained volatility forecasters should be evaluated not only by their architecture, but also by their deployment policy.
Riku Green, Zahraa S. Abdallah, Telmo M Silva Filho