Supplementary Notes -- Trend Forecasting -- Constant Percent Rate of Growth
Given this data:
Sales Time Period (year)
6500 15
6500 14
5750 13
5250 12
4750 11
3750 10
3500 9
3000 8
3000 7
2750 6
2500 5
2250 4
2000 3
1750 2
1750 1
A linear trend model assumes that there is a constant dollar amount of increase in sales per time period The implementation of the simple linear trend regression model is easy: the dependent variable data points are the sales figures and the independent variable data points are the years. Thus the relationship is postulated to be : Sales = a + bT, where T is time (year). Performing this regression using the above data yields the equation: Sales = 759 + 363T (roughly)
Given the seemingly curved pattern of the data above, when plotted, maybe a different assumption makes better sense -- that there is a constant percent inccrease in sales per time period. That is, a constant rate of growth. This approach is often better in time-series work, such as trend projection.
a. but to explore this idea, you can not use "regular" regression, because the function would not be linear in this case.
b. the general functional relationship for constant percent growth is:
Qt = Q0(1+g)t ,where Q0 is base period sales
where t is time period
where g is the growth rate
c. the answer is to use a logarithmic form:
(using the rules of logs)
log Qt = log Q0 + t log(1+g)
here, the coeffic. ( b ) which comes out of the regression will be the log of (1+g), where g is the growth rate (% growth).
The data to be input will be the logs of the Sales figs. at each time t (dep. vlb.) , and the t's (1,2,3,...) will be the independent variable.
The reported (by program) constant term will be the log of sales in the period before t=1. ( Qo )
(logs to base 10 used here)
d. The result of running the regression is:
approximately: Qt = 3.169 + .044 t
(245.8) (31.1)
R square = .99, ts in paren.
e. but, to interpret the equation, convert back from logs:
Qt = antilog(3.169) x [antilog(.044)]t
Log10 which is:
Qt = $1475.7 (1.107)t
for t=23 :
Q = $1475.7 (1.107)23 =$15,300
3. Compare this with the projection for yr=23 using the simple linear trend model regression (const. annual $ increase )
a. the figure, using orig. regression equation
(for yr =23), is 9117 mil. [759.52 + (363.39x23)]
b. using the first approach results in a drastic underestimate when projecting a distant time period.