MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2233028753

EVIDENCE ON HEDGE RATIOS CHANGES AROUND THE SUBPRIME MORTGAGE CRISIS

2010· article· en· W2233028753 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wei-Hsi Hsu

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubprime mortgage crisisBankruptcySubprime crisisBusinessHedgeFinancial crisisFutures contractStock (firearms)Hedge fundFinancial systemFinancial economicsMonetary economicsEconomicsFinanceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the subprime mortgage crisis period, the New Century Financial Corporation was the biggest subprime mortgage lender in the United States and declared bankruptcy on April 2, 2007. This paper compared two types of hedge ratios--the hedge ratio before April 2, 2007 and the hedge ratio after April 2, 2007. We applied the hedge ratios of American, British, Canadian, German, Hong Kong and Japanese stock futures markets to examine the hypothesis. It is shown that the serious subprime mortgage crisis has led to a greater average hedge ratio in all six markets and the average hedge ratio has had a more obvious change in America, Britain, and Hong Kong. In other words, the results show that when the investors are in the asymmetry return of the financial assets they are inclined to weigh adverse evidence more heavily. The results are consistent with the findings of Lien (2005). These findings are helpful to risk managers dealing with stock index futures in the above 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 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)0.007
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
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207