The present paper seeks to effectively address the following question: What Bitcoin looks like? To do so, we regress Bitcoin price on different variables (potential Bitcoin fundamentals recorded in the literature) by applying an ARDL Bounds Testing approach for daily data covering the period from December 2010 to June 2014. Our findings highlight the speculative behavior of Bitcoin. This virtual currency may be also used for economic reasons. However, there is any sign of being a safe haven. By considering the Chinese trading bankruptcy, the contribution of speculation (proxied by investorsâ attractiveness to Bitcoin) remains dominant, indicating the robustness of our results.
The present study addresses one of the most problematic phenomena: Bitcoin price. We explore the Granger causality for two relationships (Bitcoin price and transactions; Bitcoin price and investorsâ attractiveness) from a frequency domain perspective using Breitung and Candelonâs (2006) approach. Intuitively, this research gauges empirically the causal links between these variables unconditionally on the one hand and conditionally to the Chinese stock market and the processing power of Bitcoin network on the other hand. The observed outcomes reveal some differences with respect to the frequencies involved, highlighting the complexity of assessing what Bitcoin looks like and the difficulty to gain clearer insights into this nascent crypto-currency. Beyond the nuances of short-, medium- and long-run frequencies, this paper confirms the extremely speculative nature of Bitcoin without neglecting its usefulness in economic reasons (trade transactions). The consideration of the Chinese market index and the hash rate has led to solid and unambiguous findings connecting further Bitcoin to speculation.
This paper discusses the potential and limitations of Bitcoin as a digital currency. Bitcoin as a digital asset has been extensively discussed from the viewpoints of engineering and security design. But there are few economic analyses of Bitcoin as a currency. Bitcoin was designed as a payments vehicle and as a store of value (or speculation). It has no use bar as money or currency. Despite recent enthusiasm for Bitcoin, it seems very unlikely that currencies provided by central banks are at risk of being replaced, primarily because of the market price instability of Bitcoin (i.e. the exchange rate against the major currencies). We diagnose the instability of market price of Bitcoin as being a symptom of the lack of flexibility in the Bitcoin supply schedule â a predetermined algorithm in which the proof of work is the major driving force. This paper explores the problem of instability from the viewpoint of economics and suggests a new monetary policy rule (i.e. monetary policy without a central bank) for stabilizing the values of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.
Bitcoins are digital gold. They are a purely electronic commodity traded for speculative purposes as well as in exchange for goods and services. Just like physical gold, the relative price of bitcoins denominated in different currencies implies a nominal exchange rate. This is a departure from previous literature which treats bitcoin prices themselves as nominal exchange rates. I argue that treating prices as exchange rates is inappropriate as one would not consider the price of physical gold to be an exchange rate. Therefore, this paper characterizes the behavior of nominal exchange rates implied by relative bitcoin prices. I show that the implied nominal exchange rate is highly cointegrated with the nominal exchange rate determined in conventional foreign currency exchange markets. I also show that the direction of causality flows from the conventional markets to the bitcoin market and not vice-versa which can explain much of the volatility in bitcoin prices.
The complexity and interdependence of the economies of various geographical and political entities have one generic binder - money. The economic history of the last century, replicated in the first decade of our century, can be âwrittenâ with money. Indeed, money, a multiple discovery of the civilization in its historical way, was and still is the guardian of hope for prosperity. The disputes about money clearly indicate the need, opportunity and the possibility of monetary competition, which would provide, from the point of view of entrepreneurs, the most suitable production of money based on expectations of their economic preferences. Increasingly more, theorists, practitioners and analysts bring to the fore the issue of simultaneously using the official currency and the digital one. Thus, the issue of the public debate regarding the private money is still of interest. Based on these considerations, this paper aims to highlight how the digital currency Bitcoin can meet the challenges of the economic environment, taking into account both the opportunities and the threats to which it is subject, and the records emphasized by the history of economic thought and adapted to the current reality.
Bitcoin is an unregulated digital currency originally introduced in 2008 without legal tender status. Based on a decentralized peer-to-peer network to confirm transactions and generate a limited amount of new bitcoins, it functions without the backing of a central bank or any other monitoring authority. In recent years, Bitcoin has seen increasing media coverage and trading volume, as well as major capital gains and losses in a high volatility environment. Interestingly, an analysis of Bitcoin returns shows remarkably low correlations with traditional investment assets such as other currencies, stocks, bonds or commodities such as gold or oil. In this paper, we shed light on the impact an investment in Bitcoin can have on an already well-diversified investment portfolio. Due to the non-normal nature of Bitcoin returns, we do not propose the classic mean-variance approach, but adopt at Conditional Value-at-Risk framework that does not require asset returns to be normally distributed. Our results indicate that Bitcoin should be included in optimal portfolios. Even though an investment in Bitcoin increases the CVaR of a portfolio, this additional risk is overcompensated by high returns leading to better risk-return ratios.
An important function of the financial system is to serve as a key source of information that helps coordinate decentralized decision-making in various sectors of the economy. Households and investors use interest rates, futures prices and security prices in making their consumption-saving decisions and portfolio allocation decisions. Interest rates and prices provide important signals to managers of firms in their selection of investment projects and financings. This paper illustrates the role played by financial markets in providing information about the future volatility-that is, the degree of uncertainty-of economic variables such as interest rates, exchange rates, commodity prices, and stock, bond and other security prices. It has two basic goals: (1) to show the importance of volatility for all sorts of policy decisions in the private and public sectors of the economy; and (2) to show how ex ante estimates of future volatility can be extracted from the prices of securities.
Security breaches of the cryptocurrency exchanges usually cause the price fluctuation in the market. Approximately one hundred cryptocurrency thefts, including hacks and scams, has occurred since 2012 to 2018, half of which are hacks of Bitcoins. Based on the thirty Bitcoin hacks, this study portrays the general price pattern during the hack. And it illustrates the link between the size of the hack and the subsequent price change of Bitcoin. The tests reveal that the larger the volume of the hack, the stronger the price drop. However, a similar obvious relationship does not exist for the recovery of the price. The study might be the first piece of research focus on the hacks and the price pattern in a short time period.