An investment decision-making model to predict the risk and return in stock market: An Application of ARIMA-GJR-GARCH
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
In deciding to invest in stocks traded in the capital market, investors need to predict which stocks provide the prospect of return and the risks to be faced. This paper aims to predict the return and risk of stock asymmetry using a time series model approach. Predicting stock returns and risk is based on the Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average-Glosten Jagannatan Runkle-Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity (ARIMA-GJR-GARCH) model. In contrast, the largest risk potential measurement is performed using the Value-at-Risk (VaR) model. The data analyzed are the best ten stocks according to the criteria that apply on the IDX, the period between 17 December 2018 to 14 December 2021, which includes the names of stock BBCA, BBNI, BBRI, BMRI, ASII, ICBP, PGAS, PTBA, TLKM, and UNVR. The analysis results show that of the best ten stocks, based on the ratio between the predicted values of the average return and Value-at-Risk, those with relatively better performance are PTBA, TLKM, UNVR and BBCA stocks. Based on the results of this analysis, it can be used as a reference in making investment decisions for investors, specifically investing in the ten stocks analyzed.
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 | 0.056 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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