The Asymmetric Effects of Oil Price Volatility on Stock Returns: Evidence from Ho Chi Minh Stock Exchange
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is the first to investigate the asymmetric effects of oil price volatility on stock returns for the Ho Chi Minh Stock Exchange (HOSE). We utilized weekly series of VN30-Index, WTI crude oil prices, geopolitical risks (GPR) index, and gold prices spanning from 6 February 2012 to 31 December 2023 as data sources. Using a nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag (NARDL) bounds testing approach, we found that, in the shortterm, oil price volatility has negative asymmetric effects on market returns. Specifically, in the shortterm, a 1 percent increase in oil price volatility immediately leads to a 2.6868 percent decrease in the market returns, while a similar magnitude decrease in oil price volatility is associated with a 6.3180 percent increase in the market returns. In addition, the results obtained from the NARDL model indicated that, in the longterm, the negative and positive changes of oil price volatility have significantly negative effects on the market returns. Finally, the findings derived from the error correction model (ECM) show that a 98.21 percent deviation from the equilibrium level in the previous week is converged and corrected back to the long-term equilibrium in the current week.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".