Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,383

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Speculative bubbles in Bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of Bitcoin

Open access
Cheah, Eng-Tuck, Fry, John·2015·Economics Letters
DOI 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.029
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Amid its rapidly increasing usage and immense public interest the subject of Bitcoin has raised profound economic and societal issues. In this paper we undertake economic and econometric modelling of Bitcoin prices. As with many asset classes we show that Bitcoin exhibits speculative bubbles. Further, we find empirical evidence that the fundamental price of Bitcoin is zero.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.029

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,383

Metadata

Authors
Cheah, E.-T., & Fry, J.
Venue
Economics Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-05
Volume
130
Pages
32-36
ISSN
0165-1765 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.029
OpenAlex
W2042442456
Cited by
1,383
References
2
FWCI
114.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Speculative bubbles in Bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of Bitcoin. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.029
The paper
Cheah, E.-T., & Fry, J. (2015). Speculative bubbles in Bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of Bitcoin. Economics Letters. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.029

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.