Optimizing Portfolio Risk of Cryptocurrencies Using Data-Driven Risk Measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Portfolio risk management plays an important role in successful investments. Portfolio standard deviation, value-at-risk, expected shortfall, and maximum absolute deviation are widely used portfolio risk measures. However, the existing portfolio risk measures are vulnerable to larger skewness and kurtosis of the asset returns. Moreover, the traditional assumption of normality of the portfolio returns leads to the underestimation of portfolio risk. Cryptocurrencies are a decentralized digital medium of exchange. In contrast to physical money, cryptocurrency payments exist purely as digital entries on an online ledger called blockchain that describe specific transactions. Due to the high volume and high frequency of cryptocurrency transactions, risk forecasting using daily data is not enough, and a high-frequency analysis is required. High-frequency data reveal a very high excess kurtosis and skewness for returns of cryptocurrencies. In order to incorporate larger skewness and kurtosis of the cryptocurrencies, a data-driven portfolio risk measure is minimized to obtain the optimal portfolio weights. A recently proposed data-driven volatility forecasting approach with daily data are used to study risk forecasting for cryptocurrencies with high-frequency (hourly) big data. The paper emphasizes the superiority of portfolio selection of cryptocurrencies by minimizing the recently proposed risk measure over the traditional minimum variance portfolio.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".