Bidirectional Risk Spillovers between Chinese and Asian Stock Markets: A Dynamic Copula-EVT-CoVaR Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to investigate bidirectional risk spillovers between the Chinese and other Asian stock markets. To achieve this, we construct a dynamic Copula-EVT-CoVaR model based on 11 Asian stock indexes from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2021. The findings show that, firstly, synchronicity exists between the Chinese stock market and other Asian stock markets, creating conditions for risk contagion. Secondly, the Chinese stock market exhibits a strong risk spillover to other Asian stock markets with time-varying and heterogeneous characteristics. Additionally, the risk spillover displays an asymmetry, indicating that the intensity of risk spillover from other Asian stock markets to the Chinese is weaker than that from the Chinese to other Asian stock markets. Finally, the Chinese stock market generated significant extreme risk spillovers to other Asian stock markets during the 2007–2009 global financial crisis, the European debt crisis, the 2015–2016 Chinese stock market crash, and the China–US trade war. However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, the risk spillover intensity of the Chinese stock market was weaker, and it acted as the recipient of risk from other Asian stock markets. The originality of this study is reflected in proposing a novel dynamic copula-EVT-CoVaR model and incorporating multiple crises into an analytical framework to examine bidirectional risk spillover effects. These findings can help Asian countries (regions) adopt effective supervision to deal with cross-border risk spillovers and assist Asian stock market investors in optimizing portfolio strategies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".