MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393444972 · doi:10.33423/jaf.v24i1.6881

A Note on the Impact of the Canada-India Diplomatic Standoff on the Performance of Canadian Mutual Funds Investments in India

2024· article· en· W4393444972 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
F N U Pratima, Srinivas Nippani, Hanh Phan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Accounting and Finance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On June 18, 2023, Mr. Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen of Indian origin, was killed in Canada. On September 18, 2023, the Canadian Prime Minister, Mr. Justin Trudeau, accused the Indian Government of involvement in killing Mr. Nijjar in the Canadian Parliament. This accusation preceded and succeeded by other events, led to a significant diplomatic standoff that is still ongoing. We examine the impact of this event chain on the performance of daily returns of mutual funds based in Canada that are predominantly invested in Indian securities. Our results, controlled for general stock market returns, fund size, expense ratio, and interest rates, indicate that the events negatively impacted fund performance. Our study adds to the existing literature on the benefits of international diversification of mutual funds in disconnected markets. The findings of this paper suggest that political discord between two distinct and unrelated economies may impact profits and negate the advantages of international diversification. Our study is significant to professionals, particularly mutual fund managers, as it demonstrates the role of two countries’ political ties in affecting mutual fund returns.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Accounting and FinanceSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207