MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313332456 · doi:10.1108/jrf-07-2022-0179

The Russia–Ukraine conflict and foreign stocks on the US market

2022· article· en· W4313332456 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Risk Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock marketCapital marketPoliticsEconomicsEvent studyQuality (philosophy)Stock (firearms)BusinessFinancial economicsMarket economyMonetary economicsFinancePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The authors investigate how market quality diverges between foreign firms and domestic firms on the US stock market in response to the Russia–Ukraine conflict. Design/methodology/approach With an event study approach, the authors compare foreign firms with domestic firms in their market responses over the three-day window around the outbreak of the war. Further, with Difference-in-Difference (DID) analyses, the authors study the change in foreign firms' market quality upon this outbreak in comparison with their domestic counterparts. Finally, the authors compare the foreign firms across firm specific characteristics and home country characteristics. Findings The authors find that foreign stocks listed in the US experience more severe market quality deterioration compared to the stocks' domestic counterparts. This effect is especially strong for companies from countries considered friendlier towards Russia and companies that are not cross-listed. The authors' findings are consistent with the information asymmetry hypothesis concerning market quality. Moreover, US market investors have more concerns over political risks with non-US-aligned political standings during war times. Research limitations/implications The authors' findings are consistent with the information asymmetry hypothesis concerning market quality. Moreover, US market investors have more concerns over political risks over non-US-aligned political standings during war time. Practical implications Since both countries in the conflict are in Europe, the US stock market, to a certain degree, becomes a safe haven for capital from Europe and other countries. In the meantime, American Depository Receipts (ADRs) have been important for US investors to create a globally diversified portfolio, and the knowledge regarding ADRs' vulnerability to international geopolitical events is valuable. The author' results are informative for stock market investors to understand the market dynamics for international and domestic companies during this extremely uncertain time. Originality/value This is the first study that examines the market quality divergence between foreign firms and domestic firms on the US stock market in response to the Russia–Ukraine conflict. The authors provide novel evidence on the change in ADRs' market quality associated with significant political uncertainty. The authors show that ADRs' market quality is more vulnerable to international geopolitical risks relative to otherwise comparable domestic firms.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.179 · 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