Unveiling the Influencing Factors of Cryptocurrency Return Volatility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The blossoming of cryptocurrencies during the last decade has largely influenced both the financial and the technological world. Bitcoin emerged on the edge of the financial crisis in 2008, signaling the very beginning of a financial and technological innovation, which in continuance would eventually create a lot of questions and debate previously unforeseeable. This paper aims to explore the impact of factors such as trading volume, information demand, stock returns, and exchange rates on the volatility of returns for decentralized and unbacked cryptocurrencies from 2016 to 2022 by employing the GARCH model. Based on each coin’s innate functional characteristics and market performance quantified by their respective market capitalization, the selection included Bitcoin, Ether, and XRP as representative crypto coins for the category of decentralized and unbacked cryptocurrencies. The implementation of correlation analysis and the use of the GARCH model on influencing factors for each coin revealed that decentralized and unbacked cryptocurrencies are positively related to trading volume, information demand, and exchange rates while being indifferent to a certain extent to the stock market returns of the world stock index MSCI ACWI. The results of this study provide further insight into the behavior of cryptocurrency return volatility in the new, ever-changing, and highly unpredictable crypto market as well as aid investors in their decision-making process concerning portfolio optimization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".