The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the return-volatility relationship in the Bitcoin market around the price crash of 2013
Open accessAbstract
The authors examine the relation between price returns and volatility changes in the Bitcoin market using a daily database denominated in US dollar. The results for the entire period provide no evidence of an asymmetric return-volatility relation in the Bitcoin market. The authors test if there is a difference in the return-volatility relation before and after the price crash of 2013 and show a significant inverse relation between past shocks and volatility before the crash and no significant relation after. This finding shows that, prior to the price crash of December 2013, positive shocks increased the conditional volatility more than negative shocks. This inverted asymmetric reaction of Bitcoin to positive and negative shocks is contrary to what one observes in equities. As leverage effect and volatility feedback do not adequately explain this reaction, the authors propose the safe-haven effect (Baur, Asymmetric volatility in the gold market, 2012). They highlight the benefits of adding Bitcoin to a US equity portfolio, especially in the pre-crash period. Robustness analyses show, among others, a negative relation between the US implied volatility index (VIX) and Bitcoin volatility. Those additional analyses further support the findings and provide useful information for economic actors who are interested in adding Bitcoin to their equity portfolios or are curious about the capabilities of Bitcoin as a financial asset.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Computation and analysis of multiple structural change models
Bai, J., & Perron, P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Econometrics · doi:10.1002/jae.659 · Cited by 5,771
Cited by
The inefficiency of Bitcoin revisited: A dynamic approach
Bariviera, A. F. (2017) · Economics Letters · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2017.09.013 · Cited by 617
Metadata
- Authors
- Bouri, E., Azzi, G., & Dyhrberg, A. H.
- Venue
- Economics
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2017-02-16
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1864-6042 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2571894309
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 45.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
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.
