MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401511780 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17080351

Exploring Calendar Anomalies and Volatility Dynamics in Cryptocurrencies: A Comparative Analysis of Day-of-the-Week Effects before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

2024· article· en· W4401511780 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sonal Sahu, Alejandro Fonseca Ramírez, Jong‐Min Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryptocurrencyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicVolatility (finance)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEconometricsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)EconomicsComputer scienceMedicineVirologyInternal medicineComputer securityInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates calendar anomalies and their impact on returns and volatility patterns in the cryptocurrency market, focusing on day-of-the-week effects before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using advanced statistical models from the GARCH family, we analyze the returns of Binance USD, Bitcoin, Binance Coin, Cardano, Dogecoin, Ethereum, Solana, Tether, USD Coin, and Ripple. Our findings reveal significant shifts in volatility dynamics and day-of-the-week effects on returns, challenging the notion of market efficiency. Notably, Bitcoin and Solana began exhibiting day-of-the-week effects during the pandemic, whereas Cardano and Dogecoin did not. During the pandemic, Binance USD, Ethereum, Tether, USD Coin, and Ripple showed multiple days with significant day-of-the-week effects. Notably, positive returns were generally observed on Sundays, whereas a shift to negative returns on Mondays was evident during the COVID-19 period. These patterns suggest that exploitable anomalies persist despite the market’s continuous operation and increasing maturity. The presence of a long-term memory in volatility highlights the need for robust trading strategies. Our research provides valuable insights for investors, traders, regulators, and policymakers, aiding in the development of effective trading strategies, risk management practices, and regulatory policies in the evolving cryptocurrency market.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207