Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33285851›Full record

ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Complexity Changes in the US and China's Stock Markets: Differences, Causes, and Wider Social Implications.

Jianbo Gao, Yunfei Hou, Fangli Fan, Feiyan Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jianbo GaoCenter for Geodata and Analysis, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China.
Yunfei HouSchool of Economics and Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2933-738X
Fangli FanCenter for Geodata and Analysis, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China.
Feiyan LiuInternational College, Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9435-9353

Funding

China Postdoctoral Science Foundation 2016M592605National Natural Science Foundation of China 41671532National Natural Science Foundation of China 71661002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How different are the emerging and the well-developed stock markets in terms of efficiency? To gain insights into this question, we compared an important emerging market, the Chinese stock market, and the largest and the most developed market, the US stock market. Specifically, we computed the Lempel-Ziv complexity (LZ) and the permutation entropy (PE) from two composite stock indices, the Shanghai stock exchange composite index (SSE) and the Dow Jones industrial average (DJIA), for both low-frequency (daily) and high-frequency (minute-to-minute)stock index data. We found that the US market is basically fully random and consistent with efficient market hypothesis (EMH), irrespective of whether low- or high-frequency stock index data are used. The Chinese market is also largely consistent with the EMH when low-frequency data are used. However, a completely different picture emerges when the high-frequency stock index data are used, irrespective of whether the LZ or PE is computed. In particular, the PE decreases substantially in two significant time windows, each encompassing a rapid market rise and then a few gigantic stock crashes. To gain further insights into the causes of the difference in the complexity changes in the two markets, we computed the Hurst parameter

Indexed as

EMHHurst parameterLempel–Ziv complexitypermutation entropythe US and China’s stock market

Identifiers

PMID33285851
PMCPMC7516507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.