MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405721267 · doi:10.3390/jrfm17120576

Dynamics of Stock Prices on the Bulgarian Stock Exchange Against the Background of Fundamentals

2024· article· en· W4405721267 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dimiter Nenkov, Yanko Hristozov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBulgarianStock exchangeStock (firearms)EconomicsFinancial economicsMonetary economicsEconometricsBusinessGeographyFinanceLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subject of this research is the performance of stocks on the Bulgarian Stock Exchange (BSE). The main issue of interest is whether the index price levels are supported by fundamentals or if there is a bubble or undervaluation on the BG stock market. The purpose of this research is to explore the true level of indexes at the BSE, as dictated by fundamentals, and compare it with actual index levels. The research method is based on the comparative analysis of price-earnings ratios (PEs) and price-to-book ratios (PBVs) of the index during the analyzed period. The 2024 PE and PBV of the index are compared with fundamental PE and PBV ratios of the BGBX 40 index, which are derived from the fundamentals, determining the value of stocks in the index. The actual PE and PBV ratios of BGBX 40 look rather low compared with the ones in the leading developed stock markets. At the same time, however, the results of this analysis show that these current PE and PBV ratios are much higher than the benchmark values of the fundamental PE and PBV ratios. In this regard, the current price levels of stocks at the Bulgarian Stock Exchange in 2024 do not seem supported by fundamentals.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 risk and financial managementSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207