Growth of Stock Market in the UAE through Merger: A Comparative Study of GCC Stock Markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, stock exchanges have increasingly been forming alliances or merging with each other. This study is carried out with the objective of finding out the benefits of having a larger single stock market in the UAE instead of the present two separate markets: Abu Dhabi Securities Exchange and Dubai Financial Market. The study covers a period of five years from 2010 to 2014. This study is based on secondary data collected from various stock exchanges in the GCC. The various stock markets in the GCC are compared against each other on the basis of volume and value of trading, market capitalization, number of shares listed and number of days traded. Then, a similar analysis is carried out with the combined ADX and DFM. It is observed that the merger of ADX and DFM brings in benefits on all these parameters. The study also shows that the merger will benefit all the stakeholders by reducing cost of operations facilitated by the large scale operations, sophisticated technology, single trading platform, one investor number, lower trading cost and earlier break-even. Moreover, through the merger the UAE will be able to attract more local and regional companies which will enhance the revenue, profitability and presence in the region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".