Beyond the Silicon Valley of the East: Exploring Portfolio Diversification with India and MINT Economies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past few decades, India’s tech industry has boomed, making it a leader in the digital world. Today, India has many big tech companies, well-trained software developers, and cutting-edge technology like AI and cloud computing. This success shows India’s innovative spirit and makes the country a good example for other developing nations. However, global portfolio managers often overlook potential diversification opportunities beyond India’s dynamic stock market. This study investigates the viability of MINT (Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Turkey) as diversification targets, specifically analyzing spillover effects and volatility dynamics between their stock markets and that of India. Leveraging vector autoregressions (VARs) and dynamic conditional correlation (DCC)–GARCH models, we uncover intricate relationships. Further, DCC–GARCH analysis reveals varying degrees of volatility spillover, offering valuable insights for risk management. Our findings suggest that MINT economies, particularly Mexico and Turkey, hold promise for Indian portfolio diversification. By strategically incorporating these markets, investors can potentially mitigate India-specific risks and enhance portfolio returns. We urge global portfolio managers to consider Turkey as a viable diversification avenue, acknowledging the nuanced market growth dynamics highlighted in this study.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".