Dynamics between crude oil and equity markets under the risk-neutral measure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article investigates the time series relationship between equity and crude oil markets using option-implied risk-neutral moments. We recover daily time series of constant-maturity risk-neutral volatility (RNV), skewness and kurtosis using options data for the S&P 500 and WTI oil futures over the period January 1996 to October 2011. The transmission of shocks is analysed for each risk-neutral moment using a vector autoregression model where each market is represented by one equation. Impulse response functions and variance decompositions are recovered and analysed. Our contribution is to document the transmission of shocks measured through investor anticipations in both markets. Our results suggest the transmission of shocks measured through investor anticipations is different under the risk-neutral measure than under the physical measure previously studied in the literature. Shocks to equity market RNV and skewness are transmitted to oil RNVand skewness while the reverse is not observed. However, shocks to risk-neutral kurtosis in one market do not affect the other market. The crystallized changes in investor anticipations in equity markets are eventually passed on to oil markets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".