SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2407.15766

Analyzing selected cryptocurrencies spillover effects on global financial indices: Comparing risk measures using conventional and eGARCH-EVT-Copula approaches

Abstract

This study examines the interdependence between cryptocurrencies and international financial indices, such as MSCI World and MSCI Emerging Markets. We compute the value at risk, expected shortfall (ES), and range value at risk (RVaR) and investigate the dynamics of risk spillover. We employ a hybrid approach to derive these risk measures that integrate GARCH models, extreme value models, and copula functions. This framework uses a bivariate portfolio approach involving cryptocurrency data and traditional financial indices. To estimate the above risks of these portfolio structures, we employ symmetric and asymmetric GARCH and both tail flexible EVT models as marginal to model the marginal distribution of each return series and apply different copula functions to connect the pairs of marginal distributions into a multivariate distribution. The empirical findings indicate that the eGARCH EVT-based copula model adeptly captures intricate dependencies, surpassing conventional methodologies like Historical simulations and t-distributed parametric in VaR estimation. At the same time, the HS method proves superior for ES, and the t-distributed parametric method outperforms RVaR. Eventually, the Diebold-Yilmaz approach will be applied to compute risk spillovers between four sets of asset sequences. This phenomenon implies that cryptocurrencies reveal substantial spillover effects among themselves but minimal impact on other assets. From this, it can be concluded that cryptocurrencies propose diversification benefits and do not provide hedging advantages within an investor's portfolio. Our results underline RVaR superiority over ES regarding regulatory arbitrage and model misspecification. The conclusions of this study will benefit investors and financial market professionals who aspire to comprehend digital currencies as a novel asset class and attain perspicuity in regulatory arbitrage.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shafique Ur Rehman, Touqeer Ahmad, Wu Dash Desheng, Amirhossein Karamoozian. 2024-07-22. Analyzing selected cryptocurrencies spillover effects on global financial indices: Comparing risk measures using conventional and eGARCH-EVT-Copula approaches. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.15766

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Simplifying Cyber Cat(astrophe)s with Cyber Kittens: Power Law Plausibility for Cyber Insurance Risks

Cyber insurance requires accurate modeling of worst-case catastrophic (cat) events, but the field lacks robust quantitative approaches for estimating upper-bound losses. Building on a recent dataset of 24 cyber cat events over 30 years, this work tests whether cyber economic losses follow a power law distribution. We analyze "cyber kittens" - sub-1B USD events distinguished from cat events (1B+ USD) only by magnitude - extracted via LLM from cyber insurance claims data (2020-2024). Using victim count (weighted by claim year) as a proxy for economic loss, we link kitten-sized events to known cat events to estimate losses. The kitten distribution proved consistent with the cat dataset, and power laws were statistically plausible: each order-of-magnitude increase in event size corresponds to a 5-7x drop in probability. Extrapolating, an event 100x the largest 2020-2024 cat event is expected roughly every 206 years, translating to 100-250B USD in losses - catastrophic, but not extraordinary relative to other insurance lines.

q-fin.RM

Pricing the DeFi Tail: Do Protocols or Depositors Price Operational Risk?

Similar to banks, DeFi protocols expose depositors to operational risk (USD 9.45 billion across 1,075 events since 2020). Unlike banks, they are not required to hold capital against it. A protocol may maintain a buffer voluntarily. Absent one, the risk falls on the depositor, who should then demand a risk premium in the supply yield. I quantify the underlying tail on one benchmark, a per-sector Basel loss-distribution approach fitted to a new operational risk event dataset, and test both margins against it. Tails in the four core sectors are no heavier than the Moscadelli banking band $[0.85, 1.39]$. Bridge, Derivatives, and the residual Other sector exhibit cyber-loss-level tails ($\hat\xi \approx 1.6$), with point estimates past the infinite-mean boundary. The Lending tail implies a $\mathrm{VaR}_{99.9}$ capital buffer of 18% of TVL and of the ten largest Lending venues, the four holding a buffer cover on average 5% of it. Under market discipline, depositors should demand a higher yield in compensation where a venue does not maintain a buffer. I find that venues without a buffer pay a higher premium than those with (a 125-bps gap in medians): evidence the market discriminates in the right direction. However, the premium falls far short of an adequately priced tail. This unpriced tail falls disproportionately on the retail depositor, who sees only the posted rate but lacks the information and skills to price it. Because these products are not bank-regulated, I recommend disclosure over capital mandates: protocols, and any service providers that front access to it, should publish standardized losses, existing capital buffers and tail coverage.

q-fin.RM

Illiquidity at Risk

Market efficiency relies fundamentally on stable liquidity. Consequently, forecasting liquidity dynamics is a priority for both investors and regulators. We introduce a new tail-risk metric, Illiquidity-at-Risk (IlliQaR), designed to quantify the magnitude of extreme liquidity dry-ups. Relying upon the realized Amihud (a precise illiquidity measurement derived from high-frequency data as the ratio of realized volatility to trading volume) we assess the predictive power of various linear and non-linear econometric models, with a specific focus on the impact of discontinuous jump components. Accounting for these jumps is essential for achieving accurate probability coverage and better IlliQaR predictions during periods of systemic stress, where standard continuous models systematically underestimate the severity of liquidity evaporation. Our empirical analysis, encompassing the S&P 500 index and a cross-section of 25 large U.S. equities, demonstrates that incorporating jumps significantly improves forecasts of illiquidity. Our results suggest that individual stock IlliQaR violations often cluster during periods of S&P 500 liquidity stress. This indicates that Illiquidity at Risk is not just a localized concern but a systemic one, where the main index acts as a leading indicator for extreme dry-ups in individual stock liquidity.

q-fin.RM