MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466728838 · doi:10.1016/j.rfe.2016.06.005

Dynamic correlations and volatility linkages between stocks and <i>sukuk</i>: Evidence from international markets

2016· article· en· W2466728838 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Sclip, Alberto Dreassi, Stefano Miani, Andrea Paltrinieri

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Financial Economics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSukukBondVolatility (finance)Equity (law)EconomicsDiversification (marketing strategy)Financial economicsFinancial crisisAsset allocationPortfolioBusinessMonetary economicsFinanceIslamIslamic finance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An understanding of volatility and co‐movements in financial markets is important for portfolio allocation and risk management practices. The current financial crisis caused a shrinkage in values of most assets, an increased volatility and a threat to the survival of several institutional investors. Managing risks and returns within the classic portfolio theory, when correlations across securities soar, is increasingly challenging. In this paper, we investigate the volatility behavior and the co‐movements between sukuk and international stock indexes. Symmetric multivariate GARCH models with dynamic conditional correlations (DCC) were estimated under Student‐t distribution. We provide evidence of high correlations between sukuk and US and EU stock markets, without finding the well‐known flight to quality behavior affecting Islamic bonds. We also show that volatility linkages between sukuk and regional market indexes are higher during financial crisis. We argue that investors could obtain diversification benefits including sukuk in a well‐diversified equity portfolio, given their lower volatility compared to equity. But higher volatility linkages and dynamic correlations during financial crises show that they are hybrid instruments between bonds and equity. Our findings are relevant for institutional investors and asset managers that include Islamic bonds in a diversified portfolio.

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)0.008
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations50
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Financial EconomicsSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207