Realized Volatility, Jump and Beta: evidence from Canadian Stock Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inclusion of jump component in the price process has been a long debate in finance literature. In this paper, we identify and characterize jump risks in the Canadian stock market using high-frequency data from the Toronto Stock Exchange. Our results provide a strong evidence of jump clustering – about 30% of jumps occur within first 30 minutes of trading hours, and about 25% of jumps are due to the overnight returns. While average intraday jump is negative, jumps induced by overnight returns bring a cancellation effect yielding average size of the jumps to zero. We show that the economic significance of jump component in volatility forecasting is significant but nominal. Our results further demonstrate that market jumps and overnight returns bring significant changes in systematic risk of stocks. From a cross-sectional perspective, while the average effect of market jumps on the beta is not significantly different from zero, the average effect of overnight returns is statistically significant. Overall, our results suggest that systematic risk induced by the market jumps could be hedged by combining value stocks and growth stocks in a portfolio whereas the systematic risk induced by overnight returns can not be hedged even with a well 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".