MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2416951838 · doi:10.21314/jem.2014.118

Carbon price volatility and financial risk management

2014· article· en· W2416951838 on OpenAlexaff
Perry Sadorsky

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Energy Markets · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)EconometricsAutoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityPortfolioNatural gas pricesEconomicsFinancial economicsCarbon priceNatural gasHeteroscedasticityDiversification (marketing strategy)BusinessGreenhouse gasChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Carbon dioxide emissions represent a new traded asset that, in addition to reducing carbon dioxide emissions through cap-and-trade initiatives, can offer financial risk diversification benefits. In this paper, multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH) models are used to model conditional correlations between carbon prices, oil prices, natural gas prices and stock prices. Compared with the diagonal or dynamic conditional correlation model, the constant conditional correlation model is found to fit the data the best and is used to generate hedge ratios and optimal portfolios. Carbon does not appear to be useful for hedging oil or the S&P 500 index but does seem to be useful for hedging natural gas. The average weight for the carbon/natural gas portfolio indicates that for a US$1 portfolio, 29 cents should be invested in carbon and 71 cents invested in natural gas. Hedge ratios and optimal portfolio weights vary considerably over the sample period, indicating that financial positions should be monitored frequently.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Energy MarketsSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207