Probabilistic forecasting via post-processing prediction errors: In- or out-of-sample?

Many forecasting systems produce point forecasts even when decisions require information about uncertainty. We investigate whether post-processing methods can systematically improve upon traditional Gaussian predictive distributions constructed from in-sample residuals. We propose a hybrid framework that combines forecast error post-processing with model-specific scaling of forecast uncertainty across horizons. For a comprehensive evaluation, we apply historical simulation, conformal prediction, quantile regression, and GARCH-based post-processing to point forecasts generated by Theta, exponential smoothing, and ARIMA models. Using 14,407 monthly series from the M4 competition and forecast horizons of 1 to 12 months, we evaluate performance using the continuous ranked probability score and rank-based statistical comparisons. Averaged across horizons, all post-processing variants improve upon the benchmark predictive distributions, with gains of up to 4.6%. In-sample calibration outperforms its out-of-sample counterpart in 11 of the 12 model-method combinations, although the preferred post-processing method depends on the base model and forecast horizon. The advantage of in-sample calibration generally increases at longer horizons. Our results show that organisations can extend existing point-forecasting systems to provide useful uncertainty quantification without computationally intensive repeated model re-estimation.