COVID-19 Pandemic and Indices Volatility: Evidence from GARCH Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the impact of volatility on the returns of nine National Stock Exchange (NSE) indices before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The study employed generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH) modelling to analyse investor risk and the impact of volatility on returns. The study makes several contributions to the existing literature. First, it uses advanced volatility forecasting models, such as ARCH and GARCH, to improve volatility estimates and anticipate future volatility. Second, it enhances the analysis of index return volatility. The study found that the COVID-19 period outperformed the pre-COVID-19 and overall periods. Since the Nifty Realty Index is the most volatile, Nifty Bank, Metal, and Information Technology (IT) investors reaped greater returns during COVID-19 than before. The study provides a comprehensive review of the volatility and risk of nine NSE indices. Volatility forecasting techniques can help investors to understand index volatility and mitigate risk while navigating these dynamic indices.
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 | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".