It is often reported in forecast combination literature that a simple average of candidate forecasts is more robust than sophisticated combining methods. This phenomenon is usually referred to as the forecast combination puzzle. Motivated by this puz
zle, we explore its possible explanations including estimation error, invalid weighting formulas and model screening. We show that existing understanding of the puzzle should be complemented by the distinction of different forecast combination scenarios known as combining for adaptation and combining for improvement. Applying combining methods without consideration of the underlying scenario can itself cause the puzzle. Based on our new understandings, both simulations and real data evaluations are conducted to illustrate the causes of the puzzle. We further propose a multi-level AFTER strategy that can integrate the strengths of different combining methods and adapt intelligently to the underlying scenario. In particular, by treating the simple average as a candidate forecast, the proposed strategy is shown to avoid the heavy cost of estimation error and, to a large extent, solve the forecast combination puzzle.
