MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149467294 · doi:10.1002/fut.20382

Empirical evidence on the dependence of credit default swaps and equity prices

2009· article· en· W2149467294 on OpenAlexaff
Debbie J. Dupuis, Éric Jacquier, Nicolas Papageorgiou, Bruno Rémillard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Futures Markets · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)UnivariateCredit default swapEconometricsEquity (law)EconomicsMarkov chainMultivariate statisticsSwap (finance)Financial economicsCredit riskActuarial scienceStatisticsMathematicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the common practice of estimating the dependence structure between credit default swap prices on multi‐name credit instruments from the dependence structure of the equity returns of the underlying firms. We find convincing evidence that the practice is inappropriate for high‐yield instruments and that it may even be flawed for instruments containing only firms within a sector. To do this, we model individual credit ratings by univariate continuous time Markov chains, and their joint dynamics by copulas. The use of copulas allows us to incorporate our knowledge of the modeling of univariate processes, into a multivariate framework. However, our test and results are robust to the choice of copula. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 29:695–712, 2009

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Futures MarketsSame topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207