IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v16y2023i3p149-d1077476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enablers for Growth of Cryptocurrencies: A Fuzzy–ISM Benchmarking

Author

Listed:
  • Santosh Kumar

    (Jaipuria Institute of Management, Jaipur 302033, India)

  • Sujit Kumar Patra

    (GITAM Institute of Management, GITAM (Deemed to Be) University, Vishakhapatnam 530045, India)

  • Ankit Kumar

    (Department of Computer Engineering & Applications, GLA University, Mathura 281406, India)

  • Kamred Udham Singh

    (Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan
    Department School of Computing, Graphic Era Hill University, Dehradun 248002, India)

  • Sandeep Varshneya

    (Jaipuria Institute of Management, Jaipur 302033, India)

Abstract

Cryptocurrencies and their market capitalisation have experienced vibrant growth in the last few years. Their total market cap is more than USD 858 billion as of the date of writing and is growing, with nearly 21,984 tradeable cryptos in 530 exchanges. It is emerging as one of the biggest threats to the traditional fundraising market. The issue of the industry’s long-term viability and steady expansion is of paramount importance. Even though unsustainable and uneven growth could help boost economic activity in the short term, it would be detrimental in the long run because of the risk of extinction. This paper is one of the first attempts to identify the factors contributing to the growth of the cryptocurrency market and their effects. This paper is based on the hybrid MCDM methodology of research and uses fuzzy–ISM (interpretive structural modelling). This method is divided into three phases: identification, expert opinion, and interpretation. Sixteen factors were chosen from the previous literature and suggestions from industry professionals. Seven barriers have been framed based on the fuzzy–ISM analysis to better understand the impacts of and interrelationships among the identified barriers. The factors are further classified using fuzzy MICMAC into four major categories based on the drive power and dependence power extracted from the fuzzy matrix. This paper explains the importance of all identified factors as enablers of the acceptance of cryptocurrencies for investment and fundraising.

Suggested Citation

  • Santosh Kumar & Sujit Kumar Patra & Ankit Kumar & Kamred Udham Singh & Sandeep Varshneya, 2023. "Enablers for Growth of Cryptocurrencies: A Fuzzy–ISM Benchmarking," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:16:y:2023:i:3:p:149-:d:1077476
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/16/3/149/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/16/3/149/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Welch, Ivo, 1992. "Sequential Sales, Learning, and Cascades," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(2), pages 695-732, June.
    2. Bubna, Amit & Prabhala, Nagpurnanand R., 2011. "IPOs with and without allocation discretion: Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 530-561, October.
    3. Baron, David P, 1982. "A Model of the Demand for Investment Banking Advising and Distribution Services for New Issues," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 37(4), pages 955-976, September.
    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. Lehmann, Timo & Weber, Matthias, 2021. "IPO Underpricing and Aftermarket Price Accuracy: Auctions vs. Bookbuilding in Japan," SocArXiv sa385, Center for Open Science.
    2. Goergen, Marc & Gounopoulos, Dimitrios & Koutroumpis, Panagiotis, 2021. "Do multiple credit ratings reduce money left on the table? Evidence from U.S. IPOs," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    3. Alexander Ljungqvist & William J. Wilhelm, 2003. "IPO Pricing in the Dot‐com Bubble," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 723-752, April.
    4. Jay R. Ritter & Ivo Welch, 2002. "A Review of IPO Activity, Pricing, and Allocations," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(4), pages 1795-1828, August.
    5. Agoraki, Maria-Eleni K. & Gounopoulos, Dimitrios & Kouretas, Georgios P., 2022. "U.S. banks’ IPOs and political money contributions," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. Oehler, Andreas & Rummer, Marco & Smith, Peter N., 2004. "IPO Pricing and the Relative Importance of Investor Sentiment: Evidence from Germany," Discussion Papers 26, University of Bamberg, Chair of Finance.
    7. Chen, Zhaohui & Wilhelm Jr., William J., 2008. "A theory of the transition to secondary market trading of IPOs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 219-236, December.
    8. repec:mth:ijafr8:v:9:y:2019:i:1:p:197-208 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Smart, Scott B. & Zutter, Chad J., 2003. "Control as a motivation for underpricing: a comparison of dual and single-class IPOs," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 85-110, July.
    10. Dorsman, André & Gounopoulos, Dimitrios, 2013. "European Sovereign Debt Crisis and the performance of Dutch IPOs," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 308-319.
    11. Josef Schuster, 2003. "The Cross-Section of European IPO Returns," FMG Discussion Papers dp460, Financial Markets Group.
    12. Riccardo Ferretti & Antonio Meles, 2010. "Underpricing, wealth loss for pre-existing shareholders and the cost of going public: the role of private equity backing in Italian IPOs," Venture Capital, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 23-47, September.
    13. Pons-Sanz, Vicente, 2005. "Who benefits from IPO underpricing? Evidence form hybrid bookbuilding offerings," Working Paper Series 428, European Central Bank.
    14. Othman Yong & Zaidi Isa, 2003. "Initial performance of new issues of shares in Malaysia," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(8), pages 919-930.
    15. Cho, Sung-II, 2001. "A model for IPO pricing and contract choice decision," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 347-364.
    16. Larry Li & Tony Naughton, 2007. "Going Public with Good Governance: evidence from China," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(6), pages 1190-1202, November.
    17. Fouad Jamaani & Manal Alidarous, 2019. "Review of Theoretical Explanations of IPO Underpricing," Journal of Accounting, Business and Finance Research, Scientific Publishing Institute, vol. 6(1), pages 1-18.
    18. Wolfgang Bessler & Stefan Thies, 2006. "Initial Public Offerings, Subsequent Seasoned Equity Offerings, and Long-Run Performance: Evidence from IPOs in Germany," Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance, Pepperdine University, Graziadio School of Business and Management, vol. 11(3), pages 1-37, Fall.
    19. Samy Ben Naceur & Samir Ghazouani, 2003. "Soutien Des Cours Et Sous-Evaluation Des Introductions Sur Le Nouveau Marche," Working Papers 0320, Economic Research Forum, revised 07 Oct 2003.
    20. Schuster, Josef Anton, 2003. "The cross-section of European IPO returns," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24859, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    21. Dorota Podedworna-Tarnowska, 2018. "Underpricing of Companies Transferred from the Alternative to the Main Market: The Case of Poland," MIC 2018: Managing Global Diversities; Proceedings of the Joint International Conference, Bled, Slovenia, 30 May–2 June 2018,, University of Primorska Press.

    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:gam:jjrfmx:v:16:y:2023:i:3:p:149-:d:1077476. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.