IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bba/j00004/v2y2023i2p23-33d89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Asymmetric efficiency of cryptocurrencies during the 2020 and 2022 events

Author

Listed:
  • Mariana Chambino

    (Accounting and Finance Department, ESCE, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal)

  • Rui Manuel Teixeira Dias

    (Accounting and Finance Department, ESCE, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal)

  • Nicole Rebolo Horta

    (Accounting and Finance Department, ESCE, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal)

Abstract

In this study, we examined the efficiency of cryptocurrencies Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Litecoin (LTC), Ripple (XRP), DASH, EOS, and MONERO from March 1, 2018, to March 1, 2023. We separated the sample into four subperiods for this purpose: a Tranquil period that includes the period from March 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019; a First Wave that includes the year 2020; a Second Wave that includes the year 2021; and a fourth subperiod that includes Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022-2023. The results are mixed, with some cryptocurrencies exhibiting equilibrium and others exhibiting autocorrelation and predictability in their pricing. When the sample is divided into subperiods, most digital currencies have long memories in their returns during the Tranquil period, BTC, LTC, and XRP exhibit efficiency during the First Wave of the pandemic, while BTC, ETH, and MONERO indicate efficiency during the Second Wave. Most assessed digital currencies showed equilibrium by 2022, with the exception of ETH and MONERO, which exhibit long memories, and LTC, which demonstrates anti-persistence. These results hold significance for investors in these alternative markets, as they suggest that some cryptocurrencies may be more predictable and therefore potentially profitable, whereas others may require greater caution and risk management strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mariana Chambino & Rui Manuel Teixeira Dias & Nicole Rebolo Horta, 2023. "Asymmetric efficiency of cryptocurrencies during the 2020 and 2022 events," Economic Analysis Letters, Anser Press, vol. 2(2), pages 23-33, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bba:j00004:v:2:y:2023:i:2:p:23-33:d:89
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.anserpress.org/journal/eal/2/2/22/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.anserpress.org/journal/eal/2/2/22
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew W. Lo, A. Craig MacKinlay, 1988. "Stock Market Prices do not Follow Random Walks: Evidence from a Simple Specification Test," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 41-66.
    2. Chu, Jeffrey & Zhang, Yuanyuan & Chan, Stephen, 2019. "The adaptive market hypothesis in the high frequency cryptocurrency market," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 221-231.
    3. Jarque, Carlos M. & Bera, Anil K., 1980. "Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 255-259.
    4. Im, Kyung So & Pesaran, M. Hashem & Shin, Yongcheol, 2003. "Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 53-74, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rui Dias & Nicole Horta & Mariana Chambino, 2023. "Clean Energy Action Index Efficiency: An Analysis in Global Uncertainty Contexts," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Olimpia Neagu, 2019. "The Link between Economic Complexity and Carbon Emissions in the European Union Countries: A Model Based on the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Benjamin Miranda Tabak, 2003. "The random walk hypothesis and the behaviour of foreign capital portfolio flows: the Brazilian stock market case," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(5), pages 369-378.
    4. Anwar Hasan Abdullah Othman & Salina Kassim & Romzie Bin Rosman & Nur Harena Binti Redzuan, 2020. "Prediction accuracy improvement for Bitcoin market prices based on symmetric volatility information using artificial neural network approach," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(5), pages 314-330, October.
    5. Carmen López-Martín & Sonia Benito Muela & Raquel Arguedas, 2021. "Efficiency in cryptocurrency markets: new evidence," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(3), pages 403-431, September.
    6. Jean-Marie DUFOUR & Lynda KHALAF & Marcel VOIA, 2013. "Finite-Sample Resampling-Based Combined Hypothesis Tests, with Applications to Serial Correlation and Predictability," Cahiers de recherche 13-2013, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    7. Zaidi, Syed Anees Haider & Ashraf, Rana Umair & Hassan, Taimoor, 2024. "Effects of globalization and financial inclusion on energy intensity: The case of emerging economies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    8. Manahov, Viktor & Urquhart, Andrew, 2021. "The efficiency of Bitcoin: A strongly typed genetic programming approach to smart electronic Bitcoin markets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    9. Tirunillai, S. & Tellis, G.J., 2011. "Does Online Chatter Really Matter? Dynamics of User-Generated Content and Stock Performance," ERIM Report Series Research in Management 25817, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    10. Dowd, Kevin & Cairns, Andrew J.G. & Blake, David & Coughlan, Guy D. & Epstein, David & Khalaf-Allah, Marwa, 2010. "Evaluating the goodness of fit of stochastic mortality models," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 255-265, December.
    11. Hiremath, Gourishankar S & Kumari, Jyoti, 2014. "Stock returns predictability and the adaptive market hypothesis in emerging markets: evidence from India," MPRA Paper 58378, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Jennifer Roberts, 1999. "Sensitivity of elasticity estimates for OECD health care spending: analysis of a dynamic heterogeneous data field," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(5), pages 459-472, August.
    13. José A. Roldán-Casas & Mª B. García-Moreno García, 2022. "A procedure for testing the hypothesis of weak efficiency in financial markets: a Monte Carlo simulation," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(5), pages 1289-1327, December.
    14. Pao, Hsiao-Tien & Tsai, Chung-Ming, 2010. "CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in BRIC countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7850-7860, December.
    15. Felix Schindler, 2014. "Persistence and Predictability in UK House Price Movements," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 132-163, January.
    16. Sadorsky, Perry, 2009. "Renewable energy consumption, CO2 emissions and oil prices in the G7 countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 456-462, May.
    17. Akber, Ushna & Muhammad, Nabeel, 2013. "Is Pakistan Stock Market moving towards Weak-form efficiency? Evidence from the Karachi Stock Exchange and the Random Walk Nature of free-float of shares of KSE 30 Index," MPRA Paper 49128, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Tim Bollerslev & Robert J. Hodrick, 1992. "Financial Market Efficiency Tests," NBER Working Papers 4108, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Felix Schindler, 2013. "Predictability and Persistence of the Price Movements of the S&P/Case-Shiller House Price Indices," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 44-90, January.
    20. Jonathan Manton & Anton Muscatelli & Vikram Krishnamurthy & Stan Hurn, "undated". "Modelling Stock Market Excess Returns by Markov Modulated Gaussian Noise," Working Papers 9806, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bba:j00004:v:2:y:2023:i:2:p:23-33:d:89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ramona Wang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.anserpress.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.