加密货币交易所和传统市场:使用多标准决策分析的多算法流动性比较

IF 1.9 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Computational Economics Pub Date : 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1007/s10614-024-10655-9
Bhaskar Tripathi, Rakesh Kumar Sharma
{"title":"加密货币交易所和传统市场:使用多标准决策分析的多算法流动性比较","authors":"Bhaskar Tripathi, Rakesh Kumar Sharma","doi":"10.1007/s10614-024-10655-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper investigates whether cryptocurrency exchanges exhibit greater liquidity than traditional financial markets. Utilizing four different liquidity measures, we evaluate the liquidity of six leading cryptocurrency exchanges and nine traditional small-cap stock indices across diverse geographies and rank the markets according to their liquidities. We investigate the Pre-Pandemic, First and Second-wave COVID-19, and post-pandemic economic periods. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, employing Borda and Keener Ranking techniques, is used to validate the robustness of our liquidity rankings. Our findings reveal that the Russel 2000 Small Cap is the most liquid among traditional markets, while Binance is the most liquid cryptocurrency exchange. Results show that Small-cap indices are generally more liquid than cryptocurrency exchanges. However, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, individual and institutional investors used cryptocurrencies as a safe haven, with Binance exhibiting better liquidity than traditional markets such as Nifty SC 100. In the post-pandemic period, cryptocurrency market liquidity significantly deteriorated compared to pre-pandemic levels. We argue that despite investors using cryptocurrencies as diversification tools during economic stress periods, cryptocurrencies fail to serve as a dependable asset allocation tool compared to small-cap equities. With contributions encompassing a pre and post-pandemic liquidity assessment, the development of a multifaceted liquidity framework utilizing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, and liquidity comparisons between traditional and cryptocurrency markets, this study delivers substantive enhancements to the analysis and understanding of global market liquidity for traders and researchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":50647,"journal":{"name":"Computational Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cryptocurrency Exchanges and Traditional Markets: A Multi-algorithm Liquidity Comparison Using Multi-criteria Decision Analysis\",\"authors\":\"Bhaskar Tripathi, Rakesh Kumar Sharma\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10614-024-10655-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper investigates whether cryptocurrency exchanges exhibit greater liquidity than traditional financial markets. Utilizing four different liquidity measures, we evaluate the liquidity of six leading cryptocurrency exchanges and nine traditional small-cap stock indices across diverse geographies and rank the markets according to their liquidities. We investigate the Pre-Pandemic, First and Second-wave COVID-19, and post-pandemic economic periods. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, employing Borda and Keener Ranking techniques, is used to validate the robustness of our liquidity rankings. Our findings reveal that the Russel 2000 Small Cap is the most liquid among traditional markets, while Binance is the most liquid cryptocurrency exchange. Results show that Small-cap indices are generally more liquid than cryptocurrency exchanges. However, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, individual and institutional investors used cryptocurrencies as a safe haven, with Binance exhibiting better liquidity than traditional markets such as Nifty SC 100. In the post-pandemic period, cryptocurrency market liquidity significantly deteriorated compared to pre-pandemic levels. We argue that despite investors using cryptocurrencies as diversification tools during economic stress periods, cryptocurrencies fail to serve as a dependable asset allocation tool compared to small-cap equities. With contributions encompassing a pre and post-pandemic liquidity assessment, the development of a multifaceted liquidity framework utilizing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, and liquidity comparisons between traditional and cryptocurrency markets, this study delivers substantive enhancements to the analysis and understanding of global market liquidity for traders and researchers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50647,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computational Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computational Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-024-10655-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-024-10655-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究了加密货币交易所是否比传统金融市场表现出更高的流动性。利用四种不同的流动性衡量标准,我们评估了不同地区六家领先加密货币交易所和九个传统小盘股指数的流动性,并根据其流动性对市场进行了排名。我们对大流行前、第一波和第二波 COVID-19 以及大流行后的经济时期进行了调查。采用博尔达和基纳排名技术的多重标准决策分析被用来验证我们的流动性排名的稳健性。我们的研究结果表明,罗素 2000 小型股指数是传统市场中流动性最好的,而 Binance 则是流动性最好的加密货币交易所。结果显示,小型股指数的流动性普遍高于加密货币交易所。然而,在 COVID-19 大流行的第二波期间,个人和机构投资者将加密货币作为避风港,Binance 表现出比 Nifty SC 100 等传统市场更好的流动性。疫情过后,加密货币市场的流动性与疫情前相比明显下降。我们认为,尽管投资者在经济压力时期将加密货币作为多样化工具,但与小盘股票相比,加密货币未能成为可靠的资产配置工具。本研究的贡献包括大流行前后的流动性评估、利用多标准决策分析法开发的多方面流动性框架以及传统市场和加密货币市场的流动性比较,为交易商和研究人员分析和了解全球市场流动性提供了实质性的帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cryptocurrency Exchanges and Traditional Markets: A Multi-algorithm Liquidity Comparison Using Multi-criteria Decision Analysis

This paper investigates whether cryptocurrency exchanges exhibit greater liquidity than traditional financial markets. Utilizing four different liquidity measures, we evaluate the liquidity of six leading cryptocurrency exchanges and nine traditional small-cap stock indices across diverse geographies and rank the markets according to their liquidities. We investigate the Pre-Pandemic, First and Second-wave COVID-19, and post-pandemic economic periods. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, employing Borda and Keener Ranking techniques, is used to validate the robustness of our liquidity rankings. Our findings reveal that the Russel 2000 Small Cap is the most liquid among traditional markets, while Binance is the most liquid cryptocurrency exchange. Results show that Small-cap indices are generally more liquid than cryptocurrency exchanges. However, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, individual and institutional investors used cryptocurrencies as a safe haven, with Binance exhibiting better liquidity than traditional markets such as Nifty SC 100. In the post-pandemic period, cryptocurrency market liquidity significantly deteriorated compared to pre-pandemic levels. We argue that despite investors using cryptocurrencies as diversification tools during economic stress periods, cryptocurrencies fail to serve as a dependable asset allocation tool compared to small-cap equities. With contributions encompassing a pre and post-pandemic liquidity assessment, the development of a multifaceted liquidity framework utilizing Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, and liquidity comparisons between traditional and cryptocurrency markets, this study delivers substantive enhancements to the analysis and understanding of global market liquidity for traders and researchers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Computational Economics
Computational Economics MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
15.00%
发文量
119
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Computational Economics, the official journal of the Society for Computational Economics, presents new research in a rapidly growing multidisciplinary field that uses advanced computing capabilities to understand and solve complex problems from all branches in economics. The topics of Computational Economics include computational methods in econometrics like filtering, bayesian and non-parametric approaches, markov processes and monte carlo simulation; agent based methods, machine learning, evolutionary algorithms, (neural) network modeling; computational aspects of dynamic systems, optimization, optimal control, games, equilibrium modeling; hardware and software developments, modeling languages, interfaces, symbolic processing, distributed and parallel processing
期刊最新文献
Assessing the Dual Impact of the Social Media Platforms on Psychological Well-being: A Multiple-Option Descriptive-Predictive Framework Modeling Asset Price Process: An Approach for Imaging Price Chart with Generative Diffusion Models Is the Price of Ether Driven by Demand or Pure Speculation? Iterative Deep Learning Approach to Active Portfolio Management with Sentiment Factors Asset Prices with Investor Protection in the Cross-Sectional Economy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1