4.7 Article

How to effectively estimate the time-varying risk spillover between crude oil and stock markets? Evidence from the expectile perspective

Journal

ENERGY ECONOMICS
Volume 84, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2019.104562

Keywords

CAR-ARCHE model; EVaR; Prudence level; Time-varying downside risk spillover effect

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71774051]
  2. Changjiang Scholars Program of the Ministry of Education of China [Q2016154]
  3. National Program for Support of Top-notch Young Professionals [W02070325]
  4. Hunan Youth Talent Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the integration and financialization of world economy, massive hot money has frequently flowed between crude oil and stock markets, and has brought significant extreme risks and their spillover. For this reason, this paper develops the ARCH-Expectile model with embedded Conditional AutoRegressive structure (namely CAR-ARCHE model) and expectile-based VaR (EVaR) approach, and investigates the time-varying risk spillover between WTI futures market and US, UK, Japanese and global stock markets, respectively. The results indicate that, for one thing, the EVaR approach based on CAR-ARCHE model is more adequate than the conventional quantile-based VaR (QVaR) approach based on GED-GARCH for WTI and stock markets, which is due to the evident advantages of expectile compared to quantile. For another, the unidirectional downside risk spillover effects from WTI to the four stock markets and vice-versa are only remarkable during major events and present variations with jumps, but the bidirectional downside risk spillover effects between them are significant for each time point during the in-sample period, which indicate that the simultaneous risk spillover between WTI and stock markets are fairly pronounced. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available