Gold against Asian Stock Markets during the COVID-19 Outbreak
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
This study examines the safe-haven and hedging roles of gold against thirteen Asian stock markets during the COVID-19 outbreak. During the COVID-19 sub-period, gold is shown to be a strong hedge (diversifier) for the majority (minority) of Asian stock markets; it exhibits the property of a strong safe-haven in China, Indonesia, Singapore, and Vietnam, and a weak safe-haven in Pakistan and Thailand. The optimal weights of all stock-gold portfolios are lower during the COVID-19 sub-period than the pre COVID-19 sub-period, suggesting that portfolio investors should increase their investment in gold during the COVID-19 sub-period. The hedging effectiveness for most Asian stock markets is higher during the COVID-19 sub-period. Further analyses show that the hedge portfolio returns in many cases are mostly driven by gold implied volatility and inflation expectations in both sub-periods. Our findings have useful implications for market participants holding investments in Asian stocks during stressful periods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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