Contrasting Cryptocurrencies with Other Assets: Full Distributions and the COVID Impact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate any similarity and dependence based on the full distributions of cryptocurrency assets, stock indices and industry groups. We characterize full distributions with entropies to account for higher moments and non-Gaussianity of returns. Divergence and distance between distributions are measured by metric entropies, and are rigorously tested for statistical significance. We assess the stationarity and normality of assets, as well as the basic statistics of cryptocurrencies and traditional asset indices, before and after the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. These assessments are not subjected to possible misspecifications of conditional time series models which are also examined for their own interests. We find that the NASDAQ daily return has the most similar density and co-dependence with Bitcoin daily return, generally, but after the COVID-19 outbreak in early 2020, even S&P500 daily return distribution is statistically closely dependent on, and indifferent from Bitcoin daily return. All asset distances have declined by 75% or more after the COVID-19 outbreak. We also find that the highest similarity before the COVID-19 outbreak is between Bitcoin and Coal, Steel and Mining industries, and after the COVID-19 outbreak is between Bitcoin and Business Supplies, Utilities, Tobacco Products and Restaurants, Hotels, Motels industries, compared to several others. This study shed light on examining distribution similarity and co-dependence between cryptocurrencies and other asset classes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".