Stock Market Volatility Response to COVID-19: Evidence from Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated how stock market volatility responded dynamically to unexpected changes during the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting uncertainty in Thailand. Using a multivariate GARCH-BEKK model, the conditional volatility dynamics, the interlinkages, and the conditional correlations between stock market volatility and the increasing rate of COVID-19 infection cases are examined. The increased rate of COVID-19 infections impacts stock returns detrimentally; in Thailand, stock market volatility responses are asymmetric in the increase and decline situations. This disparity is due to the unfavourable impact of the pandemic’s volatility. Finally, we acknowledge that directional volatility spillover effects exist between the increase in COVID-19 cases and stock returns, suggesting that time-varying conditional correlations occur and are generally positive. Using this study’s results, governments and financial institutions can devise strategies for subsequent recessions or financial crises. Furthermore, investment managers can manage portfolio risk and forecast patterns in stock market volatility. Academics can apply our methodology in future investment trend studies to analyse additional variables in the economic system, such as the value of the US dollar, the price of commodities, or GDP.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".