Search results

This study aims to investigate the co-volatility patterns between cryptocurrencies and conventional asset classes across global markets, encompassing 26 global indices ranging from equities, commodities, real estate, currencies and bonds.

It used a multivariate factor stochastic volatility model to capture the dynamic changes in covariance and volatility correlation, thus offering empirical insights into the co-volatility dynamics. Unlike conventional research on price or return transmission, this study directly models the time-varying covariance and volatility correlation.

The study uncovers pronounced co-volatility movements between cryptocurrencies and specific indices such as GSCI Energy, GSCI Commodity, Dow Jones 1 month forward and U.S. 10-year TIPS. Notably, these movements surpass those observed with precious metals, industrial metals and global equity indices across various regions. Interestingly, except for Japan, equity indices in the USA, Canada, Australia, France, Germany, India and China exhibit a co-volatility movement. These findings challenge the existing literature on cryptocurrencies and provide intriguing evidence regarding their co-volatility dynamics.

This study significantly contributes to applying asset pricing models in cryptocurrency markets by explicitly addressing price and volatility dynamics aspects. Using the stochastic volatility model, the research adding methodological contribution effectively captures cryptocurrency volatility's inherent fluctuations and time-varying nature. While previous literature has primarily focused on bitcoin and a few other cryptocurrencies, this study examines the stochastic volatility properties of a wide range of cryptocurrency indices. Furthermore, the study expands its scope by examining global asset markets, allowing for a comprehensive analysis considering the broader context in which cryptocurrencies operate. It bridges the gap between traditional asset pricing models and the unique characteristics of cryptocurrencies.

This study empirically demonstrates a contradiction between pillar 3 of Basel norms III and the designation of Systemically Important Banks (SIBs), also known as Too Big to Fail (TBTF). The objective of this study is threefold, which has been approached in a phased manner. The first is to determine the systemic importance of the banks under study; second, to examine if market discipline exists at different levels of systemic importance of banks and lastly, to examine if the strength of market discipline varies at different levels of systemic importance.

This study is based on all the public and private sector banks operating in the Indian banking sector. The Gaussian Mixture Model algorithm has been utilized to classify banks into distinct levels of systemic importance. Thereafter, market discipline has been observed by analyzing depositors' sentiments toward banks' risk (CAMEL indicators). The analysis has been performed by employing the system Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) to estimate models with different dependent variables.

The findings affirm the existence of market discipline across all levels of systemic importance. However, the strength of market discipline varies with the systemic importance of the banks, with weak market discipline being a negative externality of the SIBs designation.

By employing the Gaussian Mixture Model algorithm to develop a framework for categorizing banks on the basis of their systemic importance, this study is the first to go beyond the conventional method as outlined by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

Foreign direct investment in the real estate (FDIRE) sector is required to bridge the gap between investment needed and domestic funds. Further, foreign direct investment is gaining importance because other sources of raising finance such as External Commercial Borrowing and foreign currency convertible bonds have been banned in the Indian real estate sector. Therefore, the objective of the study is to explore the determinants attracting foreign direct investment in real estate and to assess the impact of those variables on foreign direct investments in real estate.

Johansen cointegration test, vector error correction model along with variance decomposition and impulse response function are employed to understand the nexus of the relationship between various macroeconomic variables and foreign direct investment in real estate.

The results indicate that infrastructure, GDP and tourism act as drivers of foreign direct investment in real estate. However, interest rates act as a barrier.

This article aimed at exploring factors attracting FDIRE along with estimating the impact of identified variables on FDI in real estate. Unlike other studies, this study considers FDI in real estate instead of foreign real estate investments.