An Empirical Comparative Analysis of the Gold Market Dynamics of the Indian and U.S. Commodity Markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the dynamic relationship between the gold markets of India and the United States from 2005 to 2025. Recognising gold’s role as a hedge and safe-haven during market uncertainty, we employ the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model to assess long-term co-integration and apply the Toda–Yamamoto causality test to evaluate directional influences. Additionally, the Generalised Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity (GARCH) (1, 1) model is applied to examine volatility spillovers. Results reveal no long-term co-integration between the two markets, suggesting they function independently over time. However, unidirectional causality is observed from the U.S. to the Indian gold market, and the GARCH model confirms bidirectional volatility transmission, indicating interconnected short-run dynamics. These findings imply that gold market shocks in one country may affect short-term pricing in the other, but not long-term trends. From a portfolio diversification and risk management perspective, investors may benefit from allocating assets across both markets. This study contributes a novel empirical framework by integrating ARDL, Toda–Yamamoto Granger causality, and GARCH(1, 1) models over a two-decade period (2005–2025), incorporating post-COVID market dynamics. The combination of these methods, applied to both an emerging (India) and developed (U.S.) economy, provides a comprehensive understanding of gold market interdependence. In doing this, the paper offers valuable insights into causality, volatility transmission, and diversification potential. The econometric rigour of the study is enhanced through residual diagnostic tests, including tests of normality, autocorrelation, and other heteroscedasticity tests, as well as VAR stability tests. These ensure strong inference and model validity; more specifically, they are pertinent to the analysis of financial time series.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".