MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404282225 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17110504

The GARCH-EVT-Copula Approach to Investigating Dependence and Quantifying Risk in a Portfolio of Bitcoin and the South African Rand

2024· article· en· W4404282225 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thabani Ndlovu, Delson Chikobvu

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
KeywordsCopula (linguistics)Autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticityPortfolioEconometricsEconomicsFinancial economicsVolatility (finance)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study uses a hybrid model of the exponential generalised auto-regressive conditional heteroscedasticity (eGARCH)-extreme value theory (EVT)-Gumbel copula model to investigate the dependence structure between Bitcoin and the South African Rand, and quantify the portfolio risk of an equally weighted portfolio. The Gumbel copula, an extreme value copula, is preferred due to its versatile ability to capture various tail dependence structures. To model marginals, firstly, the eGARCH(1, 1) model is fitted to the growth rate data. Secondly, a mixture model featuring the generalised Pareto distribution (GPD) and the Gaussian kernel is fitted to the standardised residuals from an eGARCH(1, 1) model. The GPD is fitted to the tails while the Gaussian kernel is used in the central parts of the data set. The Gumbel copula parameter is estimated to be α=1.007, implying that the two currencies are independent. At 90%, 95%, and 99% levels of confidence, the portfolio’s diversification effects (DE) quantities using value at risk (VaR) and expected shortfall (ES) show that there is evidence of a reduction in losses (diversification benefits) in the portfolio compared to the risk of the simple sum of single assets. These results can be used by fund managers, risk practitioners, and investors to decide on diversification strategies that reduce their risk exposure.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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