MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2462575724 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v8n7p193

Relationship between Foreign Exchange Rate and Stock Price of Commercial Joint Stock Banks: Evidence from Vietnam

2016· article· en· W2462575724 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tran Mong Uyen Ngan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock (firearms)Stock exchangeGranger causalityExchange rateMonetary economicsStock priceEconomicsMarket makerUs dollarCost priceLiberian dollarForeign exchangeVector autoregressionBusinessFinancial economicsStock marketEconometricsFinanceSeries (stratigraphy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between foreign exchange rate and stock price is one popular topic that is interested by not only board managers of banks but also stock investors. By using data about foreign exchange rate between Vietnam Dong (VND) and United State Dollar (USD), stock prices data of nine commercial joint stock banks in Vietnam from the first day of 2013 to the last day of 2015, this paper try to answer the question “Does foreign exchange rate impact on stock price and vice verse?”. Applying Dickey Fuller test and Var Granger Causality test for the time series data, the results show that there is an impact of foreign exchange rate on stock price. Although the fluctuation in foreign exchange rate VND/USD causes the change in stock prices of commercial joint stock banks in Vietnam, however, the vector of this impact is not clearly. On the opposite way, the change in stock price does not cause the change in foreign exchange rate, this relation is one-way relation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.097 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→