Search results

Critics say cryptocurrencies are hard to predict and lack both economic value and accounting standards, while supporters argue they are revolutionary financial technology and a new asset class. This study aims to help accounting and financial modelers compare cryptocurrencies with other asset classes (such as gold, stocks and bond markets) and develop cryptocurrency forecast models.

Daily data from 12/31/2013 to 08/01/2020 (including the COVID-19 pandemic period) for the top six cryptocurrencies that constitute 80% of the market are used. Cryptocurrency price, return and volatility are forecasted using five traditional econometric techniques: pooled ordinary least squares (OLS) regression, fixed-effect model (FEM), random-effect model (REM), panel vector error correction model (VECM) and generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (GARCH). Fama and French's five-factor analysis, a frequently used method to study stock returns, is conducted on cryptocurrency returns in a panel-data setting. Finally, an efficient frontier is produced with and without cryptocurrencies to see how adding cryptocurrencies to a portfolio makes a difference.

The seven findings in this analysis are summarized as follows: (1) VECM produces the best out-of-sample price forecast of cryptocurrency prices; (2) cryptocurrencies are unlike cash for accounting purposes as they are very volatile: the standard deviations of daily returns are several times larger than those of the other financial assets; (3) cryptocurrencies are not a substitute for gold as a safe-haven asset; (4) the five most significant determinants of cryptocurrency daily returns are emerging markets stock index, S&P 500 stock index, return on gold, volatility of daily returns and the volatility index (VIX); (5) their return volatility is persistent and can be forecasted using the GARCH model; (6) in a portfolio setting, cryptocurrencies exhibit negative alpha, high beta, similar to small and growth stocks and (7) a cryptocurrency portfolio offers more portfolio choices for investors and resembles a levered portfolio.

One of the tasks of the financial econometrics profession is building pro forma models that meet accounting standards and satisfy auditors. This paper undertook such activity by deploying traditional financial econometric methods and applying them to an emerging cryptocurrency asset class.

This paper attempts to contribute to the existing academic literature in three ways: Pro forma models for price forecasting: five established traditional econometric techniques (as opposed to novel methods) are deployed to forecast prices; Cryptocurrency as a group: instead of analyzing one currency at a time and running the risk of missing out on cross-sectional effects (as done by most other researchers), the top-six cryptocurrencies constitute 80% of the market, are analyzed together as a group using panel-data methods; Cryptocurrencies as financial assets in a portfolio: To understand the linkages between cryptocurrencies and traditional portfolio characteristics, an efficient frontier is produced with and without cryptocurrencies to see how adding cryptocurrencies to an investment portfolio makes a difference.

The authors examine the role of analysts’ prior experience of forecasting for firms exposed to epidemics on analysts’ forecast accuracy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The authors examine the impact of analysts’ prior epidemic experience on forecast accuracy by comparing the changes from the pre-COVID-19 period (calendar year 2019) to the post-COVID period extending up to March 2023 across HRE versus non-HRE analysts. The authors consider a full sample (194,980) and a sub-sample (136,836) approach to distinguish “Recent” forecasts from “All” forecasts (including revisions).

The study's findings reveal that forecast accuracy for HRE analysts is significantly higher than that for non-HRE analysts during COVID-19. Specifically, forecast errors significantly decrease by 0.6% and 0.15% for the “Recent” and “All” forecast samples, respectively. This finding suggests that analysts’ prior epidemic experience leads to an enhanced ability to assess the uncertainty around the epidemic, thereby translating to higher forecast accuracy.

The finding that the expertise developed through an experience of following high-risk firms in the past enhances analysts’ performance during the pandemic sheds light on a key differentiator that partially explains the systematic difference in performance across analysts. The authors also show that industry experience alone is not useful in improving forecast accuracy during a pandemic – prior experience of tracking firms during epidemics adds incremental accuracy to analysts’ forecasts during pandemics such as COVID-19.

The study findings should prompt macroeconomic policymakers at the national level, such as the central banks of countries, to include past epidemic experiences as a key determinant when forecasting the economic outlook and making policy-related decisions. Moreover, practitioners and advisory firms can improve the earning prediction models by placing more weight on pandemic-adjusted forecasts made by analysts with past epidemic experience.

The uncertainty induced by the COVID-19 pandemic increases uncertainty in global financial markets. Under such circumstances, the importance of analysts’ role as information intermediaries gains even more importance. This raises the question of what determines analysts’ forecast accuracy during the COVID-19 pandemic. Building upon prior literature on the role of analyst experience in shaping analysts’ forecasts, the authors examine whether experience in tracking firms exposed to prior epidemics allows analysts to forecast more accurately during COVID-19. The authors find that analysts who have experience in forecasting for firms with high exposure to epidemics (H1N1, Zika, Ebola, and SARS) exhibit higher accuracy than analysts who lack such experience. Further, this effect of experience on forecast accuracy is more pronounced while forecasting for firms with higher exposure to the risk of COVID-19 and for firms with a poor ex-ante informational environment.