Empirical Evidence of Co-Movement between the Canadian CDS, Stock Market And TSX 60 Volatility Index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose- The prime objective of this study was to find the co-movement between the Canadian credit default swaps market, the Stock market and volatility index (TSX 60 Index) Design/ Methodology- To achieve this purpose, daily data containing 2870 observations starting from the 1st of January 2009 to the 30th of December 2019 were analyzed. This study employed the wavelet approach to present results in short-term, medium-term, long-term, and very long time. Findings- The findings of this study showed a negative correlation between the CDS market, stock market, and the TSX 60 index in the short-term as well as in the long-term term, while in medium-term and very long-term period correlation is strongly positive. The wavelet co-movement results in the short-term and long-term were negative, while this relationship in the medium-term and very long-term period was strongly positive. Practical Implications- This research provides simultaneous valuable information for investment decisions in the short, medium, and long term time horizons, as well as for the policymakers in the Canadian credit default swaps market, stock market, and the volatility index (TSX 60 Index).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".