MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411344782 · doi:10.3390/jrfm18060329

Mapping Systemic Tail Risk in Crypto Markets: DeFi, Stablecoins, and Infrastructure Tokens

2025· article· en· W4411344782 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nader Naifar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMarket Dynamics and Volatility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAl-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic UniversityImam Mohammed Ibn Saud Islamic University
KeywordsSystemic riskBusinessComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates systemic tail dependence within the crypto-asset ecosystem by examining interconnectedness across eight major tokens spanning Layer 1 cryptocurrencies, DeFi tokens, stablecoins, and infrastructure/governance assets. We employ a novel partial correlation-based network framework and quantile-specific connectedness measures to examine how co-movement patterns evolve under normal and extreme market conditions from September 2021 to March 2025. Unlike conventional correlation or variance decomposition approaches, our methodology isolates direct, tail-specific transmission channels while filtering out standard shocks. The results indicate strong asymmetries in dependence structures. Systemic risk intensifies during adverse tail events, particularly around episodes such as the Terra/Luna crash, the USDC depeg, and Bitcoin’s 2024 halving cycle. Our analysis shows that ETH, LINK, and UNI are key assets in spreading losses when the market falls. In contrast, the stablecoin DAI tends to absorb some of the stress, helping reduce risk during downturns. These results indicate critical contagion pathways and suggest that regulation targeting protocol-level transparency, liquidity provisioning, and interoperability standards may reduce amplification mechanisms without eliminating interdependence. Our findings contribute to the emerging literature on crypto-systemic risk and offer actionable insights for regulators, DeFi protocol architects, and institutional investors. In particular, we advocate for the incorporation of tail-sensitive network diagnostics into real-time monitoring frameworks to better manage asymmetric spillover risks in decentralized financial systems.

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)0.002
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicMarket Dynamics and VolatilityFrench-language works237,207