MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200276817 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14120611

COVID-19 Vaccinations and the Volatility of Energy Companies in International Markets

2021· article· en· W4200276817 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ender Demir, Renatas Kizys, Wael Rouatbi, Adam Zaremba

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolatility (finance)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Emerging marketsEconomicsPandemicFinancial economicsMonetary economicsBusinessVaccinationStock marketEconometricsMedicineFinanceVirologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has elevated both the risk and volatility of energy companies. Can mass vaccinations restore stability within this sector? To answer this question, we investigate stock market data from fifty-eight countries from January 2020 to April 2021. We document that vaccination programs assist in decreasing the volatility of energy stocks around the world. The drop in volatility is statistically and economically significant and robust to many considerations. The observed phenomenon survives a broad battery of control variables; it is also independent of the employed regression model or the volatility measurement approach. Moreover, the effect is not driven by the dynamics of the pandemic itself or the associated government interventions. Finally, we find the influence of vaccinations on energy stock volatility to be more pronounced in developed markets rather than in emerging ones. Our findings bear clear practical implications: policy makers around the world should consider the essential role of vaccinations in the energy sector.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207