4.5 Article

Quantile connectedness in the cryptocurrency market

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.intfin.2021.101302

关键词

Quantile connectedness; Return spillovers; Bitcoin; Cryptocurrency; Asymmetry; COVID-19 outbreak

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR) at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia [FP-72-42]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper explores the connectedness of seven leading cryptocurrencies during a five-year period using quantile-based connectedness measures. The results indicate that the connectedness measures in the left and right tails are significantly higher than those in the mean and median, suggesting that return connectedness strengthens with shock size during extreme events.
In order to move beyond mean-based connectedness measures in the cryptocurrency mar-ket and capture connectedness under extreme events, this paper applies quantile-based connectedness measures based on the variance decomposition of a quantile vector autore-gression model. Based on the daily price data of seven leading cryptocurrencies from August 8, 2015 to December 31, 2020, the results show that the connectedness measures in the left and right tails are much higher than those in the mean and median of the con-ditional distribution. This suggests that return connectedness strengthens with shock size for both positive and negative shocks, indicating that return shocks propagate more inten-sely during extreme events relative to calm periods. While this result shows the instability of the system of connectedness under extreme events such as the COVID-19 outbreak, it implies the need to move beyond mean-based connectedness measures to understand the return connectedness under extreme negative and extreme positive shocks. Further analyses based on rolling windows show evidence of asymmetry between the behaviour of return spillovers in lower quantiles and upper quantiles. The results are robust to several alternative choices. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据