[go: up one dir, main page]

 
 
Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Article Types

Countries / Regions

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Search Results (494)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = Bitcoin

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
33 pages, 5698 KiB  
Article
DiFastBit: Transaction Differentiation Scheme to Avoid Double-Spending for Fast Bitcoin Payments
by David Melo, Saúl Eduardo Pomares-Hernández, Lil María Rodríguez-Henríquez and Julio César Pérez-Sansalvador
Mathematics 2024, 12(16), 2484; https://doi.org/10.3390/math12162484 (registering DOI) - 11 Aug 2024
Abstract
Bitcoin is a payment system that generates a decentralized digital currency without ensuring temporal constraints in its transactions; therefore, it is vulnerable to double-spending attacks. Karame has proposed a formalization for a successful double-spending attack based on meeting three requirements. This focuses on [...] Read more.
Bitcoin is a payment system that generates a decentralized digital currency without ensuring temporal constraints in its transactions; therefore, it is vulnerable to double-spending attacks. Karame has proposed a formalization for a successful double-spending attack based on meeting three requirements. This focuses on fast payment scenarios where the product is delivered immediately after the payment is announced in the mempool, without waiting for transaction confirmation. This scenario is key in Bitcoin to increase the probability of a successful double-spending attack. Different approaches have been proposed to mitigate these attacks by addressing one or more of Karame’s three requirements. These include the following: flooding every transaction without restrictions, introducing listeners/observers, avoiding isolation by blocking incoming connections, penalizing malicious users by revealing their identity, and using machine learning and bio-inspired techniques. However, to our knowledge, no proposal deterministically avoids double-spending attacks in fast payment scenarios. In this paper, we introduce DiFastBit: a distributed transaction differentiation scheme that shields Bitcoin from double-spending attacks in fast payment scenarios. To achieve this, we modeled Bitcoin from a distributed perspective of events and processes, reformulated Karame’s requirements based on Lamport’s happened-before relation (HBR), and introduced a new theorem that consolidates the reformulated requirements and establishes the necessary conditions for a successful attack on fast Bitcoin payments. Finally, we introduce the specifications for DiFastBit, formally prove its correctness, and analyze DiFastBit’s confirmation time. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modeling and Simulation Analysis of Blockchain System)
26 pages, 11376 KiB  
Article
The Effects of the Introduction of Volume-Based Liquidity Constraints in Portfolio Optimization with Alternative Investments
by Diana Barro, Antonella Basso, Stefania Funari and Guglielmo Alessandro Visentin
Mathematics 2024, 12(15), 2424; https://doi.org/10.3390/math12152424 - 4 Aug 2024
Viewed by 450
Abstract
Recently, liquidity issues in financial markets and portfolio asset management have attracted much attention among investors and scholars, fuelling a stream of research devoted to exploring the role of liquidity in investment decisions. In this paper, we aim to investigate the effects of [...] Read more.
Recently, liquidity issues in financial markets and portfolio asset management have attracted much attention among investors and scholars, fuelling a stream of research devoted to exploring the role of liquidity in investment decisions. In this paper, we aim to investigate the effects of introducing liquidity in portfolio optimization problems. For this purpose, first we consider three volume-based liquidity measures proposed in the literature and we build a new one particularly suited to portfolio optimization. Secondly, we formulate an extended version of the Markowitz portfolio selection problem, named mean–variance–liquidity, wherein the goal is to minimize the portfolio variance subject to the usual constraint on the expected portfolio return and an additional constraint on the portfolio liquidity. Thirdly, we consider a sensitivity analysis, with the aim to assess the trade-offs between liquidity and return, on the one hand, and between liquidity and risk, on the other hand. In the second part of the paper, the portfolio optimization framework is applied to a dataset of US ETFs comprising both standard and alternative, often illiquid, investments. The analysis is carried out with all the liquidity measures considered, allowing us to shed light on the relationships among risk, return and liquidity. Finally, we study the effects of the introduction of a Bitcoin ETF, as an asset with an extremely high expected return and risk. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Financial Mathematics III)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Correlation matrix of the ETFs returns. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Correlations between the liquidity measures, and correlations of the liquidity measures with the average and standard deviation of the asset returns. By Amihud, KO and CVVol we denote the reciprocal of the original illiquidity measures (<a href="#FD3-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">3</a>)–(<a href="#FD5-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">5</a>). Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Mean–variance–liquidity efficient frontiers <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>{</mo> <mo>(</mo> <mi>M</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>V</mi> <mo>}</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> obtained with the MV-L model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) using the liquidity measures AveVol (<b>a</b>), Amihud (<b>b</b>), KO (<b>c</b>), and CVVol (<b>d</b>) as the target return <span class="html-italic">M</span> and the target liquidity <span class="html-italic">L</span> vary. The red dashed line represents the mean variance frontier obtained with the MV model (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>). Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Mean–variance–liquidity efficient frontiers <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>{</mo> <mo>(</mo> <mi>M</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>V</mi> <mo>}</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> obtained with the MV-L model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) using the liquidity measures AveVol (<b>a</b>), Amihud (<b>b</b>), KO (<b>c</b>), and CVVol (<b>d</b>) as the target return <span class="html-italic">M</span> and the target liquidity <span class="html-italic">L</span> vary. The red dashed line represents the mean variance frontier obtained with the MV model (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>). Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Level curves of the mean–variance–liquidity efficient frontiers obtained with the MV-L model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) using the liquidity measures AveVol (<b>a</b>), Amihud (<b>b</b>), KO (<b>c</b>), and CVVol (<b>d</b>) as the target return <span class="html-italic">M</span> and the target liquidity <span class="html-italic">L</span> vary. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV optimization model (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>). Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) for the different liquidity measures considered, with a low target value for the liquidity constraint. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) for the different liquidity measures considered, with a medium target value for the liquidity constraint. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) for the different liquidity measures considered, with a medium target value for the liquidity constraint. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) for the different liquidity measures considered, with a high target value for the liquidity constraint. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Optimal portfolio weights for the backtesting investigation, computed with the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) using the CVVol liquidity measure for a low, medium, and high target liquidity value; the weights are compared to those obtained with the MV model (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>). Reference period: 2016–2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Dynamics of the values of the optimal portfolios selected in the backtesting investigation; the portfolios have been computed with the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) using the CVVol liquidity measure for a low, medium, and high target liquidity value; for comparison, the MV portfolio (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>) is also displayed. Reference period: 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Mean–variance–liquidity efficient frontiers <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>{</mo> <mo>(</mo> <mi>M</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>V</mi> <mo>)</mo> <mo>}</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math> obtained with the MV-L model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>), as the target return <span class="html-italic">M</span> and the target liquidity <span class="html-italic">L</span> vary, for the extended asset set including Bitcoin; the liquidity measures used are AveVol (<b>a</b>), Amihud (<b>b</b>), KO (<b>c</b>), and CVVol (<b>d</b>). The red dashed line represents the mean–variance frontier obtained with the MV model (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>). Reference period: 2016–2023. The red dashed line represents the mean–variance frontier obtained with the MV model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV optimization model (<a href="#FD7-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">7</a>) for the extended asset set including Bitcoin. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) for the extended asset set including Bitcoin; the liquidity measures used are AveVol (<b>a</b>), Amihud (<b>b</b>), KO (<b>c</b>), and CVVol (<b>d</b>) and the target value for the liquidity constraint is set to the medium level. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13 Cont.
<p>Optimal portfolio weights of the MV-L optimization model (<a href="#FD9-mathematics-12-02424" class="html-disp-formula">9</a>) for the extended asset set including Bitcoin; the liquidity measures used are AveVol (<b>a</b>), Amihud (<b>b</b>), KO (<b>c</b>), and CVVol (<b>d</b>) and the target value for the liquidity constraint is set to the medium level. Reference period: 2016–2023.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 2526 KiB  
Article
Enhancing and Validating a Framework to Curb Illicit Financial Flows (IFFs)
by Ndiimafhi Norah Netshisaulu, Huibrecht Margaretha van der Poll and John Andrew van der Poll
J. Risk Financial Manag. 2024, 17(8), 322; https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17080322 - 26 Jul 2024
Viewed by 404
Abstract
This article examines illicit financial flows (IFFs) perpetuated in financial statements to develop a framework to curb IFFs. IFFs create opacity, impeding economic progress through investment deterrents and financial uncertainty. Through a comprehensive literature review and the synthesis of sets of qualitative propositions, [...] Read more.
This article examines illicit financial flows (IFFs) perpetuated in financial statements to develop a framework to curb IFFs. IFFs create opacity, impeding economic progress through investment deterrents and financial uncertainty. Through a comprehensive literature review and the synthesis of sets of qualitative propositions, the researchers previously developed a conceptual framework to address IFFs, and the purpose of the present article is to strengthen and validate the framework among stakeholders in the financial and audit sectors. Following a mixed inductive and deductive research approach and a qualitative methodological choice, the researchers conducted interviews among practitioners to enhance the framework, followed by a focus group to validate the framework. IFF challenges that emerged are tax evasion, for example, investments in untraceable offshore accounts, harming the economy, and bitcoins not being subject to regulation everywhere in the world and being used by cryptocurrency criminals to transfer IFFs to nations with lax regulations. Internationally, IFF risks are also determined by geographical position, trade links, and porous borders among countries that emerged as further challenges, calling for entities to execute existing policies, improve tax enforcement methods, apply cross-border coordination, and practice financial reporting transparency aimed at combatting IFF practices. On the strength of these, the industry surveys significantly enhanced the conceptual framework. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Financial Accounting, Reporting and Disclosure)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p><a href="#B46-jrfm-17-00322" class="html-bibr">Saunders et al.</a> (<a href="#B46-jrfm-17-00322" class="html-bibr">2023</a>) research onion.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Conceptual IFFs framework (reworked from <a href="#B38-jrfm-17-00322" class="html-bibr">Netshisaulu et al.</a> (<a href="#B38-jrfm-17-00322" class="html-bibr">2022</a>)).</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Final framework to curb IFFs.</p>
Full article ">
30 pages, 839 KiB  
Article
Dynamics between Bitcoin Market Trends and Social Media Activity
by George Vlahavas and Athena Vakali
FinTech 2024, 3(3), 349-378; https://doi.org/10.3390/fintech3030020 - 24 Jul 2024
Viewed by 280
Abstract
This study examines the relationship between Bitcoin market dynamics and user activity on the r/cryptocurrency subreddit. The purpose of this research is to understand how social media activity correlates with Bitcoin price and trading volume, and to explore the sentiment and topical focus [...] Read more.
This study examines the relationship between Bitcoin market dynamics and user activity on the r/cryptocurrency subreddit. The purpose of this research is to understand how social media activity correlates with Bitcoin price and trading volume, and to explore the sentiment and topical focus of Reddit discussions. We collected data on Bitcoin’s closing price and trading volume from January 2021 to December 2022, alongside the most popular posts and comments from the subreddit during the same period. Our analysis revealed significant correlations between Bitcoin market metrics and Reddit activity, with user discussions often reacting to market changes. Additionally, user activity on Reddit may indirectly influence the market through broader social and economic factors. Sentiment analysis showed that positive comments were more prevalent during price surges, while negative comments increased during downturns. Topic modeling identified four main discussion themes, which varied over time, particularly during market dips. These findings suggest that social media activity on Reddit can provide valuable insights into market trends and investor sentiment. Overall, our study highlights the influential role of online communities in shaping cryptocurrency market dynamics, offering potential tools for market prediction and regulation. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>BTC closing price (USD), January 2021–December 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>BTC volume (USD), January 2021–December 2022.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Histogram of collected posts score.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC closing price and number of popular posts.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Number of popular posts vs. BTC closing price 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>BTC closing price vs. number of popular posts 15 days later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC volume and number of popular posts.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Number of popular posts vs. BTC volume 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>BTC volume vs. number of popular posts 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Number of collected r/cryptocurrency comments by date.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC closing price and number of comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Number of comments vs. BTC closing price 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>BTC closing price vs. number of comments 20 days later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC volume and number of comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Number of comments vs. BTC volume 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>BTC volume vs. number of comments 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Sentiment distribution in comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Sentiment distribution in comments through time.</p>
Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC closing price and percentage of positive comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Percentage of positive comments vs. BTC closing price 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 21
<p>BTC closing price vs. percentage of positive comments 1 day later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 22
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC closing price and percentage of neutral comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC closing price and percentage of negative comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 24
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC volume and percentage of positive comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 25
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC volume and percentage of neutral comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 26
<p>Autocorrelation between BTC volume and percentage of negative comments.</p>
Full article ">Figure 27
<p>Percentage of positive comments vs. BTC volume 6 days later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 28
<p>BTC volume vs. percentage of positive comments 6 days later.</p>
Full article ">Figure 29
<p>LDA perplexity scores vs. number of topics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 30
<p>LDA metrics vs. number of topics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 31
<p>Top ten terms for each of the four LDA topics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 32
<p>Distribution of comments in each of the four LDA topics.</p>
Full article ">Figure 33
<p>Distribution of documents in each of the four LDA topics by date.</p>
Full article ">
18 pages, 892 KiB  
Article
A Hybrid Approach Combining the Lie Method and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) Network for Predicting the Bitcoin Return
by Melike Bildirici, Yasemen Ucan and Ramazan Tekercioglu
Fractal Fract. 2024, 8(7), 413; https://doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract8070413 - 15 Jul 2024
Viewed by 497
Abstract
This paper introduces hybrid models designed to analyze daily and weekly bitcoin return spanning the periods from 18 July 2010 to 28 December 2023 for daily data, and from 18 July 2010 to 24 December 2023 for weekly data. Firstly, the fractal and [...] Read more.
This paper introduces hybrid models designed to analyze daily and weekly bitcoin return spanning the periods from 18 July 2010 to 28 December 2023 for daily data, and from 18 July 2010 to 24 December 2023 for weekly data. Firstly, the fractal and chaotic structure of the selected variables was explored. Asymmetric Cantor set, Boundary of the Dragon curve, Julia set z2 −1, Boundary of the Lévy C curve, von Koch curve, and Brownian function (Wiener process) tests were applied. The R/S and Mandelbrot–Wallis tests confirmed long-term dependence and fractionality. The largest Lyapunov test, the Rosenstein, Collins and DeLuca, and Kantz methods of Lyapunov exponents, and the HCT and Shannon entropy tests tracked by the Kolmogorov–Sinai (KS) complexity test determined the evidence of chaos, entropy, and complexity. The BDS test of independence test approved nonlinearity, and the TeraesvirtaNW and WhiteNW tests, the Tsay test for nonlinearity, the LR test for threshold nonlinearity, and White’s test and Engle test confirmed nonlinearity and heteroskedasticity, in addition to fractionality and chaos. In the second stage, the standard ARFIMA method was applied, and its results were compared to the LieNLS and LieOLS methods. The results showed that, under conditions of chaos, entropy, and complexity, the ARFIMA method did not yield successful results. Both baseline models, LieNLS and LieOLS, are enhanced by integrating them with deep learning methods. The models, LieLSTMOLS and LieLSTMNLS, leverage manifold-based approaches, opting for matrix representations over traditional differential operator representations of Lie algebras were employed. The parameters and coefficients obtained from LieNLS and LieOLS, and the LieLSTMOLS and LieLSTMNLS methods were compared. And the forecasting capabilities of these hybrid models, particularly LieLSTMOLS and LieLSTMNLS, were compared with those of the main models. The in-sample and out-of-sample analyses demonstrated that the LieLSTMOLS and LieLSTMNLS methods outperform the others in terms of MAE and RMSE, thereby offering a more reliable means of assessing the selected data. Our study underscores the importance of employing the LieLSTM method for analyzing the dynamics of bitcoin. Our findings have significant implications for investors, traders, and policymakers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fractional-Order Dynamics and Control in Green Energy Systems)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Daily bitcoin price from 18 July 2010 to 28 December 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Weekly bitcoin price from 18 July 2010 to 24 December 2023.</p>
Full article ">
7 pages, 730 KiB  
Proceeding Paper
Foreign Exchange Forecasting Models: LSTM and BiLSTM Comparison
by Fernando García, Francisco Guijarro, Javier Oliver and Rima Tamošiūnienė
Eng. Proc. 2024, 68(1), 19; https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2024068019 - 4 Jul 2024
Viewed by 260
Abstract
Knowledge of foreign exchange rates and their evolution is fundamental to firms and investors, both for hedging exchange rate risk and for investment and trading. The ARIMA model has been one of the most widely used methodologies for time series forecasting. Nowadays, neural [...] Read more.
Knowledge of foreign exchange rates and their evolution is fundamental to firms and investors, both for hedging exchange rate risk and for investment and trading. The ARIMA model has been one of the most widely used methodologies for time series forecasting. Nowadays, neural networks have surpassed this methodology in many aspects. For short-term stock price prediction, neural networks in general and recurrent neural networks such as the long short-term memory (LSTM) network in particular perform better than classical econometric models. This study presents a comparative analysis between the LSTM model and BiLSTM models. There is evidence for an improvement in the bidirectional model for predicting foreign exchange rates. In this case, we analyse whether this efficiency is consistent in predicting different currencies as well as the bitcoin futures contract. Full article
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of The 10th International Conference on Time Series and Forecasting)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Cell structure of an LSTM network. Source: “CC” by E. A. Santos. Licenced under BY CC-SA 4.0.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>BiLSTM structure. Source: [<a href="#B25-engproc-68-00019" class="html-bibr">25</a>]. Licenced under BY CC BY 4.0.</p>
Full article ">
9 pages, 834 KiB  
Proceeding Paper
Modeling the Asymmetric and Time-Dependent Volatility of Bitcoin: An Alternative Approach
by Abdulnasser Hatemi-J
Eng. Proc. 2024, 68(1), 15; https://doi.org/10.3390/engproc2024068015 - 4 Jul 2024
Viewed by 323
Abstract
Volatility as a measure of financial risk is a crucial input for hedging, portfolio diversification, option pricing and the calculation of the value at risk. In this paper, we estimate the asymmetric and time-varying volatility for Bitcoin as the dominant cryptocurrency in the [...] Read more.
Volatility as a measure of financial risk is a crucial input for hedging, portfolio diversification, option pricing and the calculation of the value at risk. In this paper, we estimate the asymmetric and time-varying volatility for Bitcoin as the dominant cryptocurrency in the world market. A novel approach that explicitly separates the falling markets from the rising ones is utilized for this purpose. The empirical results have important implications for investors and financial institutions. Our approach provides a position-dependent measure of risk for Bitcoin. This is essential since the source of risk for an investor with a long position is the falling prices, while the source of risk for an investor with a short position is the rising prices. Thus, providing a separate risk measure in each case is expected to increase the efficiency of the underlying risk management in both cases compared to the existing methods in the literature. Full article
(This article belongs to the Proceedings of The 10th International Conference on Time Series and Forecasting)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Time plot of the exchange rate for Bitcoin.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>Time plot of the exchange rate for the positive component of Bitcoin.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>Time plot of the exchange rate for the negative component of Bitcoin.</p>
Full article ">
15 pages, 483 KiB  
Article
Can Economic, Geopolitical and Energy Uncertainty Indices Predict Bitcoin Energy Consumption? New Evidence from a Machine Learning Approach
by Taha Zaghdoudi, Kais Tissaoui, Mohamed Hédi Maâloul, Younès Bahou and Niazi Kammoun
Energies 2024, 17(13), 3245; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17133245 - 2 Jul 2024
Viewed by 611
Abstract
This paper explores the predictive power of economic and energy policy uncertainty indices and geopolitical risks for bitcoin’s energy consumption. Three machine learning tools, SVR (scikit-learn 1.5.0),CatBoost 1.2.5 and XGboost 2.1.0, are used to evaluate the complex relationship between uncertainty indices and bitcoin’s [...] Read more.
This paper explores the predictive power of economic and energy policy uncertainty indices and geopolitical risks for bitcoin’s energy consumption. Three machine learning tools, SVR (scikit-learn 1.5.0),CatBoost 1.2.5 and XGboost 2.1.0, are used to evaluate the complex relationship between uncertainty indices and bitcoin’s energy consumption. Results reveal that the XGboost model outperforms both SVR and CatBoost in terms of accuracy and convergence. Furthermore, the feature importance analysis performed by the Shapley additive explanation (SHAP) method indicates that all uncertainty indices exhibit a significant capacity to predict bitcoin’s future energy consumption. Moreover, SHAP values suggest that economic policy uncertainty captures valuable predictive information from the energy uncertainty indices and geopolitical risks that affect bitcoin’s energy consumption. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Energy Efficiency and Economic Uncertainty in Energy Market)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Outliers.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Correlation matrix.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Plot of bitcoin energy consumption forecast.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Performance metrics: (<b>a</b>) SVR; (<b>b</b>) CatBoost; (<b>c</b>) XGboost.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Performance metrics: (<b>a</b>) SVR; (<b>b</b>) CatBoost; (<b>c</b>) XGboost.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>SVR reverse-cumulative distribution of residual.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>CatBoost reverse-cumulative distribution of residual.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>XGboost-reverse cumulative distribution of residual.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Variable importance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Impact on model output.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 911 KiB  
Article
Exploring the Relationship and Predictive Accuracy for the Tadawul All Share Index, Oil Prices, and Bitcoin Using Copulas and Machine Learning
by Sara Ali Alokley, Sawssen Araichi and Gadir Alomair
Energies 2024, 17(13), 3241; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17133241 - 1 Jul 2024
Viewed by 527
Abstract
Financial markets are increasingly interlinked. Therefore, this study explores the complex relationships between the Tadawul All Share Index (TASI), West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil prices, and Bitcoin (BTC) returns, which are pivotal to informed investment and risk-management decisions. Using copula-based models, this [...] Read more.
Financial markets are increasingly interlinked. Therefore, this study explores the complex relationships between the Tadawul All Share Index (TASI), West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil prices, and Bitcoin (BTC) returns, which are pivotal to informed investment and risk-management decisions. Using copula-based models, this study identified Student’s t copula as the most appropriate one for encapsulating the dependencies between TASI and BTC and between TASI and WTI prices, highlighting significant tail dependencies. For the BTC–WTI relationship, the Frank copula was found to have the best fit, indicating nonlinear correlation without tail dependence. The predictive power of the identified copulas were compared to that of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks. The LSTM models demonstrated markedly lower Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), and Mean Absolute Scaled Error (MASE) across all assets, indicating higher predictive accuracy. The empirical findings of this research provide valuable insights for financial market participants and contribute to the literature on asset relationship modeling. By revealing the most effective copulas for different asset pairs and establishing the robust forecasting capabilities of LSTM networks, this paper sets the stage for future investigations of the predictive modeling of financial time-series data. The study highlights the potential of integrating machine-learning techniques with traditional econometric models to improve investment strategies and risk-management practices. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section C: Energy Economics and Policy)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Log returns of TASI for the period from 17 September 2014 to 5 June 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Log returns of WTI index for the period from 17 September 2014 to 5 June 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Log returns of Bitcoin index for the period from 17 September 2014 to 5 June 2023.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Student’s copula density of the TASI and BTC.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Student’s copula density of the TASI and WTI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Frank copula density of the BTC and WTI.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Forecasted values with the test data of the TASI returns.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Forecasted values with the test data of the BTC returns.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Forecasted values with the test data of the WTI returns.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>The training TASI returns with the forecasted values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>The training BTC returns with the forecasted values.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The training WTI returns with the forecasted values.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 3143 KiB  
Article
Candlestick Pattern Recognition in Cryptocurrency Price Time-Series Data Using Rule-Based Data Analysis Methods
by Illia Uzun, Mykhaylo Lobachev, Vyacheslav Kharchenko, Thorsten Schöler and Ivan Lobachev
Computation 2024, 12(7), 132; https://doi.org/10.3390/computation12070132 - 29 Jun 2024
Viewed by 447
Abstract
In the rapidly evolving domain of cryptocurrency trading, accurate market data analysis is crucial for informed decision making. Candlestick patterns, a cornerstone of technical analysis, serve as visual representations of market sentiment and potential price movements. However, the sheer volume and complexity of [...] Read more.
In the rapidly evolving domain of cryptocurrency trading, accurate market data analysis is crucial for informed decision making. Candlestick patterns, a cornerstone of technical analysis, serve as visual representations of market sentiment and potential price movements. However, the sheer volume and complexity of cryptocurrency price time-series data presents a significant challenge to traders and analysts alike. This paper introduces an innovative rule-based methodology for recognizing candlestick patterns in cryptocurrency markets using Python. By focusing on Ethereum, Bitcoin, and Litecoin, this study demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed methodology in identifying key candlestick patterns associated with significant market movements. The structured approach simplifies the recognition process while enhancing the precision and reliability of market analysis. Through rigorous testing, this study shows that the automated recognition of these patterns provides actionable insights for traders. This paper concludes with a discussion on the implications, limitations, and potential future research directions that contribute to the field of computational finance by offering a novel tool for automated analysis in the highly volatile cryptocurrency market. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Automatic detection of “Advance Block” candlestick patterns in Ethereum (ETH-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Automatic detection of “Doji Star” candlestick patterns in Ethereum (ETH-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Automatic detection of “Evening Star” candlestick patterns in Ethereum (ETH-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Automatic detection of “Advance Block” candlestick patterns in Bitcoin (BTC-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Automatic detection of “Doji Star” candlestick patterns in Bitcoin (BTC-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Automatic detection of “Evening Star” candlestick patterns in Bitcoin (BTC-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Automatic detection of “Advance Block” candlestick patterns in Litecoin (LTC-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Automatic detection of “Doji Star” candlestick patterns in Litecoin (LTC-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Automatic detection of “Evening Star” candlestick patterns in Litecoin (LTC-USD) price time series.</p>
Full article ">
13 pages, 1622 KiB  
Article
Cryptocurrency, Gold, and Stock Exchange Market Performance Correlation: Empirical Evidence
by Kanellos Toudas, Démétrios Pafos, Paraskevi Boufounou and Athanasios Raptis
FinTech 2024, 3(2), 324-336; https://doi.org/10.3390/fintech3020018 - 18 Jun 2024
Viewed by 1049
Abstract
This paper examines the correlation between three prospective investing options: the Bitcoin cryptocurrency price, gold, and the Dow Jones stock index. The main research question is whether there is a causal effect of gold and the DWJ on Bitcoin and how this effect [...] Read more.
This paper examines the correlation between three prospective investing options: the Bitcoin cryptocurrency price, gold, and the Dow Jones stock index. The main research question is whether there is a causal effect of gold and the DWJ on Bitcoin and how this effect varies on time. The study begins with a background analysis that explains the definitions and operation of cryptocurrencies, followed by a brief overview of gold and its derivatives. In addition, a historical review of stock markets is provided, with a focus on the Dow Jones index. Then, a literature review follows. Daily data from three separate periods are used, each spanning four years. The first period, running from October 2014 to September 2018, provides an overview of the introduction of official cryptocurrency price data. The second period, running from Oct 2018 to Sept 2022, captures more recent trends preceding COVID-19. The third period, from January 2020 to December 2023, is the whole COVID-19 period with the initiation, embedded, and terminal phases. Classical inductive statistical methods (descriptive, correlations, multiple linear regression) as well as time series analysis methods (autocorrelation, cross-correlation, Granger causality tests, and ARIMA modeling) are used to analyze the data. Rigorous testing for autocorrelation, multicollinearity, and homoskedasticity is performed on the estimated models. The results show a correlation of Bitcoin with gold and the DWJ. This correlation varies over time, as in the first period the correlation mainly concerns the DWJ and in the second it mainly concerns gold. By using ARIMA models, it was possible to make a forecast in a time horizon of a few days. In addition, the structure of the forecasting mechanism of gold and DWJ on Bitcoin seems to have changed during the COVID-19 crisis. The findings suggest that future research should encompass a broader dataset, facilitating comprehensive comparisons and enhancing the reliability of the conclusions drawn. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Time plots for three periods for the three sets of time series (Bitcoin, gold, DWJ).</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Multiple scatter dot matrix for both periods for Bitcoin, gold, and the DWJ.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Time series cross correlation analysis for three periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3 Cont.
<p>Time series cross correlation analysis for three periods.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Comparisons from ARIMA modeling for the three periods; observed vs. predicted values.</p>
Full article ">
22 pages, 1264 KiB  
Article
Bitcoin versus S&P 500 Index: Return and Risk Analysis
by Aubain Nzokem and Daniel Maposa
Math. Comput. Appl. 2024, 29(3), 44; https://doi.org/10.3390/mca29030044 - 9 Jun 2024
Viewed by 653
Abstract
The S&P 500 Index is considered the most popular trading instrument in financial markets. With the rise of cryptocurrencies over the past few years, Bitcoin has grown in popularity and adoption. This study analyzes the daily return distribution of Bitcoin and the S&P [...] Read more.
The S&P 500 Index is considered the most popular trading instrument in financial markets. With the rise of cryptocurrencies over the past few years, Bitcoin has grown in popularity and adoption. This study analyzes the daily return distribution of Bitcoin and the S&P 500 Index and assesses their tail probabilities using two financial risk measures. As a methodology, we use Bitcoin and S&P 500 Index daily return data to fit the seven-parameter General Tempered Stable (GTS) distribution using the advanced fast fractional Fourier transform (FRFT) scheme developed by combining the fast fractional Fourier transform algorithm and the 12-point composite Newton–Cotes rule. The findings show that peakedness is the main characteristic of the S&P 500 Index return distribution, whereas heavy-tailedness is the main characteristic of Bitcoin return distribution. The GTS distribution shows that 80.05% of S&P 500 returns are within 1.06% and 1.23% against only 40.32% of Bitcoin returns. At a risk level (α), the severity of the loss (AVaRα(X)) on the left side of the distribution is larger than the severity of the profit (AVaR1α(X)) on the right side of the distribution. Compared to the S&P 500 Index, Bitcoin has 39.73% more prevalence to produce high daily returns (more than 1.23% or less than 1.06%). The severity analysis shows that, at α risk level, the average value-at-risk (AVaR(X)) of Bitcoin returns at one significant figure is four times larger than that of the S&P 500 Index returns at the same risk. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Daily price.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Realized volatility.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Probability density functions.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Bitcoin versus <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>S</mi> <mo>&amp;</mo> <mi>P</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> 500 Index returns.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Optimal parameter (<span class="html-italic">q</span>) and minimum error value (<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>E</mi> <mi>R</mi> <mo>(</mo> <mi>k</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>q</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>).</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Value-at-risk (VaR) versus Average value-at-risk (AVaR).</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p><math display="inline"><semantics> <mfrac> <msup> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">AVaR</mi> <mi>α</mi> </msub> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi>X</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>B</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>t</mi> <mi>c</mi> <mi>o</mi> <mi>i</mi> <mi>n</mi> </mrow> </msup> <msup> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">AVaR</mi> <mi>α</mi> </msub> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi>X</mi> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> <mrow> <mi>S</mi> <mo>&amp;</mo> <mi>P</mi> <mn>500</mn> </mrow> </msup> </mfrac> </semantics></math>.</p>
Full article ">
19 pages, 2477 KiB  
Article
Testing the Nonlinear Long- and Short-Run Distributional Asymmetries Effects of Bitcoin Prices on Bitcoin Energy Consumption: New Insights through the QNARDL Model and XGBoost Machine-Learning Tool
by Kais Tissaoui, Taha Zaghdoudi, Sahbi Boubaker, Besma Hkiri and Mariem Talbi
Energies 2024, 17(12), 2810; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17122810 - 7 Jun 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 500
Abstract
This study investigates the asymmetric impacts of Bitcoin prices on Bitcoin energy consumption. Two series are shown to be chaotic and non-linear using the BDS Independence test. To take into consideration this nonlinearity, we employed the QNARDL model as a traditional technique and [...] Read more.
This study investigates the asymmetric impacts of Bitcoin prices on Bitcoin energy consumption. Two series are shown to be chaotic and non-linear using the BDS Independence test. To take into consideration this nonlinearity, we employed the QNARDL model as a traditional technique and Support Vector Machine (SVM) and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) as non-conventional approaches to study the link between Bitcoin energy usage and Bitcoin prices. Referring to QNARDL estimates, results show that the relationship between Bitcoin energy use and prices is asymmetric. Additionally, results demonstrate that changes in Bitcoin prices have a considerable effect, both short- and long-run, on energy consumption. As a result, any upsurge in the price of Bitcoin leads to an immediate boost in energy use. Furthermore, the short-term drop in Bitcoin values causes an increase in energy use. However, higher Bitcoin prices reduce energy use in the long run. Otherwise, every decline in Bitcoin prices leads to a long-term reduction in energy use. In addition, the performance metrics and convergence of the cost function provide evidence that the XGBoost model dominates the SVM model in terms of Bitcoin energy consumption forecasting. In addition, we analyze the effectiveness of several modeling approaches and discover that the XGBoost model (MSE: 0.52%; RMSE: 0.72 and R2: 96%) outperforms SVM (MSE: 4.89; RMSE: 2.21 and R2: 75%) in predicting. Results indicate that the forecast of Bitcoin energy consumption is more influenced by positive shocks to Bitcoin prices than negative shocks. This study gives insights into the policies that should be implemented, such as increasing the sustainable capacity, efficiency, and flexibility of mining operations, which would allow for the reduction of the negative impacts of Bitcoin price shocks on energy consumption. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Integration of QARDL and ML: Process Flow Diagram.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Bitcoin price and Bitcoin energy consumption index trends.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Plot of forecasted Bitcoin energy consumption.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Plot of residual convergence.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Plot of feature importance.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Plot of BEC forecast when considering recent market data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Plot of feature importance when considering recent market data.</p>
Full article ">
28 pages, 789 KiB  
Article
Unlocking Blockchain UTXO Transactional Patterns and Their Effect on Storage and Throughput Trade-Offs
by David Melo, Saúl Eduardo Pomares-Hernández, Lil María Xibai Rodríguez-Henríquez and Julio César Pérez-Sansalvador
Computers 2024, 13(6), 146; https://doi.org/10.3390/computers13060146 - 7 Jun 2024
Viewed by 772
Abstract
Blockchain technology ensures record-keeping by redundantly storing and verifying transactions on a distributed network of nodes. Permissionless blockchains have pushed the development of decentralized applications (DApps) characterized by distributed business logic, resilience to centralized failures, and data immutability. However, storage scalability without sacrificing [...] Read more.
Blockchain technology ensures record-keeping by redundantly storing and verifying transactions on a distributed network of nodes. Permissionless blockchains have pushed the development of decentralized applications (DApps) characterized by distributed business logic, resilience to centralized failures, and data immutability. However, storage scalability without sacrificing throughput is one of the remaining open challenges in permissionless blockchains. Enhancing throughput often compromises storage, as seen in projects such as Elastico, OmniLedger, and RapidChain. On the other hand, solutions seeking to save storage, such as CUB, Jidar, SASLedger, and SE-Chain, reduce the transactional throughput. To our knowledge, no analysis has been performed that relates storage growth to transactional throughput. In this article, we delve into the execution of the Bitcoin and Ethereum transactional models, unlocking patterns that represent any transaction on the blockchain. We reveal the trade-off between transactional throughput and storage. To achieve this, we introduce the spent-by relation, a new abstraction of the UTXO model that utilizes a directed acyclic graph (DAG) to reveal the patterns and allows for a graph with granular information. We then analyze the transactional patterns to identify the most storage-intensive ones and those that offer greater flexibility in the throughput/storage trade-off. Finally, we present an analytical study showing that the UTXO model is more storage-intensive than the account model but scales better in transactional throughput. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Growth trend of Ethereum storage capacity. The bar chart illustrates the exponential growth in Ethereum’s storage demand over time, peaking at 12,483 nodes and requiring nearly 6000 terabytes of storage.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Graphical representation of a DAG showing the flow of transactions in the UTXO model from a Coinbase output (1) to a single input (8), noting the divergence and convergence of paths.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Serialized graph, illustrating the transaction sequence in the account model from the origin node (1) to the end node (4).</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Scatter plot showing the dilemma faced by blockchain environments in the parameters of transactional throughput and storage efficiency. The dots indicate proposals to improve one of the two parameters, including decentralization, centralization, block size, off-chain strategies, and sharding.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Transaction scenarios in the UTXO model: (<b>a</b>) Alice splits a single output of BTC 0.2 to pay Bob BTC 0.1 and returns BTC 0.1 to herself; (<b>b</b>) Alice consolidates several smaller outputs, summing up to BTC 0.1 for Bob’s payment, and (<b>c</b>) Alice directly transfers an output of BTC 0.1 to pay Bob the exact amount due for the coffee, illustrating the flexibility in transaction structuring within the UTXO model.</p>
Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Illustration of the account model: The transition from State N to State N + 1 via a transaction where Alice sends 0.1 Ether to Bob, updating both their wallet balances.</p>
Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Histogram showing the distribution of Bitcoin transaction sizes on a logarithmic scale, compiled from a dataset of 84,474,947 transactions, highlighting the frequency of transaction sizes in megabytes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Histogram illustrating the size distribution of Ethereum transactions on a logarithmic scale, showing the variation in transaction sizes up to 0.3 megabytes.</p>
Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Visualization of a UTXO model’s subset represented as a DAG, where the highlighted subgraph <span class="html-italic">H</span> delineates the relation between spent and unspent outputs within the system.</p>
Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Splitting pattern, where a single input from A is divided into multiple outputs B, C, …, representing an n-number of possible outputs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Merging pattern, where multiple outputs from nodes B, C, …, converge into a single output at node A.</p>
Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Transferring pattern, showing a direct relation from X to receiver Y.</p>
Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Flowchart of the experimental framework used for analyzing transactional patterns in the UTXO Model, starting from data extraction using Bitcoin Core 0.22, processing with BlockSci 0.7.0 and Python 3/C++, to the final stage of converting data into figures for result interpretation and feedback iteration.</p>
Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Pie chart showing the relative distribution of splitting, merging, and transferring patterns within Bitcoin, with numerical and percentage breakdowns for each category.</p>
Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Scatter plot correlating transaction size in megabytes (MB) to the number of outputs for transactions that follow the splitting pattern, where each point represents a single transaction.</p>
Full article ">Figure 16
<p>Scatter plot showing the relation between transaction size (MB) and the corresponding number of outputs for the transferring pattern, maintaining a one-to-one spent-by relation, where each data point represents a single transaction with an equal number of inputs and outputs.</p>
Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Scatter plot showing the relation between transaction size in megabytes (MB) and the number of outputs for transactions characterized by the merging pattern, illustrating the consolidation of multiple inputs into fewer outputs.</p>
Full article ">Figure A1
<p>The illustration shows a directed acyclic graph where each vertex <span class="html-italic">S</span>, <span class="html-italic">S</span>′, <span class="html-italic">S</span>′′, <span class="html-italic">S</span>′′′ symbolizes a state in a distributed virtual machine environment.</p>
Full article ">Figure A2
<p>This figure demonstrates the transition of state from <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>U</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>e</mi> <mi>t</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> to <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>U</mi> <mi>S</mi> <mi>e</mi> <msup> <mi>t</mi> <mo>′</mo> </msup> </mrow> </semantics></math> upon execution of transaction <span class="html-italic">t</span>. Each state, represented by a vertex (e.g., <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>(</mo> <mi>A</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mn>5</mn> <mo>)</mo> </mrow> </semantics></math>), indicates an ownership state with an associated value.</p>
Full article ">
16 pages, 2953 KiB  
Article
Stochastic Patterns of Bitcoin Volatility: Evidence across Measures
by Georgia Zournatzidou, Dimitrios Farazakis, Ioannis Mallidis and Christos Floros
Mathematics 2024, 12(11), 1719; https://doi.org/10.3390/math12111719 - 31 May 2024
Viewed by 580
Abstract
This research conducted a thorough investigation of Bitcoin volatility patterns using three interrelated methodologies: R/S investigation, simple moving average (SMA), and the relative strength index (RSI). The paper jointly employes the above techniques on volatility range-based estimators to effectively capture the unpredictable volatility [...] Read more.
This research conducted a thorough investigation of Bitcoin volatility patterns using three interrelated methodologies: R/S investigation, simple moving average (SMA), and the relative strength index (RSI). The paper jointly employes the above techniques on volatility range-based estimators to effectively capture the unpredictable volatility patterns of Bitcoin. R/S analysis, SMA, and RSI calculations assess time series data obtained from our volatility estimators. Although Bitcoin is known for its high volatility and price instability, our analysis using R/S analysis and moving averages suggests the existence of underlying patterns. The estimated Hurst exponents for our volatility estimators indicate a level of persistence in these patterns, with some estimators displaying more persistence than others. This persistence underscores the potential of momentum-based trading strategies, reinforcing the expectation of additional price rises after declines and vice versa. However, significant volatility often interrupts this upward movement. The SMA analysis also demonstrates Bitcoin’s susceptibility to external market forces. These observations indicate that traders and investors should modify their risk management approaches in accordance with market circumstances, perhaps integrating a combination of momentum-based and mean-reversion tactics to reduce the risks linked to Bitcoin’s volatility. Furthermore, the existence of robust patterns, as demonstrated by our investigation, presents promising opportunities for investing in Bitcoin. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Machine Learning and Finance)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1
<p>Daily actual vs. predicted <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">p</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> volatility data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Daily actual vs. predicted <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">G</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">K</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> volatility data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Daily actual vs. predicted <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">M</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> volatility data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Daily actual vs. predicted <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">σ</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="normal">R</mi> <mi mathvariant="normal">S</mi> </mrow> <mrow> <mn>2</mn> </mrow> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> volatility data.</p>
Full article ">Figure 5
<p>RSI analysis of volatility estimators.</p>
Full article ">
Back to TopTop