This paper aims at measuring how new information is incorporated into volatility estimates. Various GARCH models are compared and estimated with daily BDI(Baltic Dry Index) data. While most researchers agree that volatility is predictable, they differ on how this volatility predictability should be modelled. This study, hence, introduces the asymmetric or leverage volatility models, in which good news and bad news have different predictability for future. We provide the systematic comparison of volatility models focusing on the asymmetric effect of news on volatility. Specifically, three diagnostic tests are provided: the sign bias test, the negative size bias test, and the positive size bias test. From the Ljung-Box test statistic for twelfth-order serial correlation for the level we do not find any significant serial correlation in the unpredictable BDI. The coefficients of skewness and kurtosis both indicate that the unpredictable BDI has a distribution which is skewed to the left and significantly flat tailed. Furthermore, the Ljung-Box test statistic for twelfth-order serial correlations in the squares strongly suggests the presence of time-varying volatility. The sign bias test, the negative size bias test, and the positive size bias test strongly indicate that large positive(negative) BDI shocks cause more volatility than small ones. This paper, also, shows that three leverage models have problems in capturing the correct impact of news on volatility and that negative shocks do not cause higher volatility than positive shocks. Specifically, the GARCH model successfully reveals the shape of the news impact curve and is a useful approach to modeling conditional heteroscedasticity of daily BDI.