MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of FII Investments on Stock Market Volatility and Foreign Exchange Reserves: The Indian Experience

2013· article· en· W39805384 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ankita Bhatia, Nawal Kishor

Bibliographic record

VenueTransnational Corporation Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGranger causalityEconomicsVolatility (finance)Unit root testStock marketExchange rateEconometricsMonetary economicsBiologyCointegration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volatility refers to the amount of uncertainty or risk about the size of changes in a security's value. The increased interest of foreign institutional investors (FIIs) in Indian equity market has been correlated frequently with the volatility in stock markets in India. This paper investigates the nature of the causal relationship between Net FII flows, the Stock Price Movements, and Foreign Exchange Reserves (FERs). The unit root test was applied to ascertain stationarity of the time series data and then by applying the Granger Causality Test, the causal relationships using monthly data for the 20 years period was tested. The results show that there is bi-directional Granger Causality between BSE (Bombay Stock Exchange) Sensex and FII Flows. Thus FII Flows are Granger Caused by BSE Sensex and BSE Sensex is Granger Caused by FII Flows. The FERs do Granger Cause BSE Sensex but BSE Sensex does not Granger Cause FERs. There is bi-directional Granger Causality between FERs and FII Flows. Thus FII flows Granger cause FERs and similarly FERs Granger Cause FII Flows.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTransnational Corporation ReviewSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207