Forecasting of dependence, market, and investment risks of a global index portfolio
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper undertakes an in‐sample and rolling‐window comparative analysis of dependence, market, and portfolio investment risks on a 10‐year global index portfolio of developed, emerging, and commodity markets. We draw our empirical results by fitting vine copulas (e.g., r‐vines, c‐vines, d‐vines), IGARCH(1,1) RiskMetrics value‐at‐risk (VaR), and portfolio optimization methods based on risk measures such as the variance, conditional value‐at‐risk, conditional drawdown‐at‐risk, minimizing regret (Minimax), and mean absolute deviation. The empirical results indicate that all international indices tend to correlate strongly in the negative tail of the return distribution; however, emerging markets, relative to developed and commodity markets, exhibit greater dependence, market, and portfolio investment risks. The portfolio optimization shows a clear preference towards the gold commodity for investment, while Japan and Canada are found to have the highest and lowest market risk, respectively. The vine copula analysis identifies symmetry in the dependence dynamics of the global index portfolio modeled. Large VaR diversification benefits are produced at the 95% and 99% confidence levels by the modeled international index portfolio. The empirical results may appeal to international portfolio investors and risk managers for advanced portfolio management, hedging, and risk forecasting.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it