Both reviewers think the paper lacked sufficient detail and analysis for publication. The authors in their replies were willing to address the issues raised by the reviewers. I am hoping that the authors will be able to complete their review within a reasonable time frame.

It is important that the authors address the validation issue, whether through cross validation or split sample. Also they should evaluate skill of forecasts and reliability in forecast uncertain spread using modern probabilistic forecast evaluation methods.

Dear authors

In your Author's Response document, you need to list each of the referee comments and then write down how you have responded to the comment. A track-change revised manuscript is not sufficient for this purpose. Thanks

QJ Wang

Dear authors,

The manuscript has been improved from the previous version and reviewer 1 deems it acceptable following a couple of minor reviews. I agree with these comments and urge you to add this to the paper before it can be accepted. I will therefore recommend a minor review, where the addition of an analysis of reliability needs to be added and discussed.

Best regards,
Fredrik Wetterhall