MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073442338 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v6n2p226

Sukuk and Bond Performance in Malaysia

2014· article· en· W2073442338 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fadma El Mosaid, Rachid Rachid Boutti

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSukukBondBond market indexIndex (typography)Bond marketIslamic financeFinancial systemCapital marketBusinessEconomicsFinancial economicsFinanceIslamGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sukuk and bonds are two kinds of financial instruments that share the Malaysian capital market. Sukuk are Sharia-compliant financial instruments referred as “Islamic bonds” in the Malaysian market (Note 1). The aim of this paper is to diagnose the performance of Sukuk portfolios compared with bond portfolios. For this purpose, we use the series of indices TR BPAM ALL BOND INDEX. Those indices cover the whole Sukuk and bond Malaysian market. We collect historical data of those indices from the website of Bond Pricing Agency of Malaysia (BPAM) for a period of six years from 2007 to 2012. We first study the significance of the difference in the portfolios’ mean return. Secondly, we address the portfolios’ return correlation. Comparing indices shows that Sukuk index outperformed the bond index and market index. Furthermore, the results confirm a significant and positive correlation between returns of Sukuk and bond portfolios.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207