A Comprehensive Statistical Analysis of the Six Major Crypto-Currencies from August 2015 through June 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After more than a decade of existence, crypto-currencies may now be considered an important class of assets presenting some unique appealing characteristics but also sharing some features with real financial assets. This paper provides a comprehensive statistical analysis of the six most important crypto-currencies from the period 2015–2020. Using daily data we (1) showed that the returns present many of the stylized facts often observed for stock assets, (2) modeled the returns underlying distribution using a semi-parametric mixture model based on the extreme value theory, (3) showed that the returns are weakly autocorrelated and confirmed the presence of long memory as well as short memory in the GARCH volatility, (4) used an econometric approach to compute risk measures, such as the value-at-risk, the expected shortfall, and drawups, (5) found that the crypto-coins’ price trajectories do not contain speculative bubbles and that they move together maintaining the long run equilibrium, and (6) using static and dynamic D-vine pair-copula models, assessed the true dependence structure among the crypto-assets, obtaining robust copula based bivariate dynamic measures of association. The analyses indicate that the strength of dependence among the crypto-currencies has increased over the recent years in the cointegrated crypto-market. The conclusions reached will help investors to manage risk while identifying opportunities for alternative diversified and profitable investments. To complete the analysis we provide a brief discussion on the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the crypto-market by including the first semester of 2020 data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".