Skip to main content

Analysis of cryptocurrency connectedness based on network to transaction volume ratios

Abstract

Network to Transaction (NVT) ratio is a measure that describes the relationship between transaction volume and market capitalization, and that may serve as an indicator for the valuation of a cryptocurrency. We build a connectedness network connecting 39 cryptocurrencies based on mutual contributions to the variances of forecast errors for NVT ratios. We find that NVT connectedness is not related to market capitalization, as we have large and small cryptocurrencies by market cap that propagate large NVT shocks (e.g. Litecoin, Dogecoin, Bitcoin Cash(bch), OMG Network and Decentraland). The largest transmitter of NVT shocks is OMG Network, which receives little public attention. Cryptocurrencies relying on proof of stake as a consensus mechanism are the smallest receivers of NVT spillovers from other cryptocurrencies. These assets are also the least interconnected, which makes them attractive from a risk diversification point of view. This complements the energy efficiency of PoS compared with proof of work.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Notes

  1. see e.g. coinmarketcap.com.

  2. see https://coinmetrics.io/an-introduction-to-mtv/.

  3. see https://coinmetrics.io/introducing-adjusted-estimates/.

References

  • Bouri, E., Molnar, P., Azzi, G., Roubaud, D., & Hagfors, L. I. (2017). On the hedge and safe haven properties of Bitcoin: Is it really more than a diversifier? Finance Research Letters, 20, 192–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheah, E-T., & Fry, J. (2015). Speculative bubbles in bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of bitcoin. Economics Letters, 130, 32–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. Y. H., Després, R., Guo, L., & Renault, T. (2018). What Makes Cryptocurrencies Special? Investor Sentiment and Price Predictability in the Absence of Fundamental Value. Discussion Paper Sfb 649. Unpublished work.

  • Chen, C.Y. H., & Hafner, C. M. (2019). Sentiment-induced bubbles in the cryptocurrency market. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 12(2), 53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, A., Roca, E., & Su, J-J. (2015). Crypto-currency bubbles: An application of the Phillips-Shi-Yu (2013) methodology on Mt.Gox bitcoin prices. Applied Economics, 47, 2348–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbet, S., Brian, L., & Larisa, Y. (2018). Datestamping the bitcoin and ethereum bubbles. Finance Research Letters, 26, 81–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbet, S., Meegan, A., Larkin, C., Lucey, B., & Yarovaya, L. (2018). Exploring the dynamic relationships between cryptocurrencies and other financial assets. Economics Letters, 165, 28–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diebold, F. X., & Yilmaz, K. (2009). Measuring financial asset return and volatility spillovers, with application to global equity markets. The Economic Journal, 119, 158–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diebold, F. X., & Yilmaz, K. (2012). Better to give than to receive: Predictive directional measurement of volatility spillovers. International Journal of Forecasting, 28, 57–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diebold, F. X., & Yilmaz, K. (2014). On the network topology of variance decompositions: Measuring the connectedness of financial firms. Journal of Econometrics, 182, 119–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elendner, T., Ong, B., & Lee, T. M. (2016). The Cross-Section of Crypto- Currencies as Financial Assets: An Overview. SFB discussion paper, Humboldt University Berlin.

  • Fry, J., & Cheah, E. T. (2016). Negative bubbles and shocks in cryptocurrency markets. International Review of Financial Analysis, 47, 343–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafner, C. (2020). Testing for bubbles in cryptocurrencies with time-varying volatility. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 18(2), 233–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafner, C. M., Herwartz, H., & Maxand, S. (2022). Identification of structural multivariate GARCH models. Journal of Econometrics, 227, 212–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hafner, C. M., & Herwartz, H. (2021). Dynamic score driven independent component analysis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350015.2021.2013244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Härdle, W. K., Harvey, C., & Reule, R. (2020). Understanding cryptocurrencies. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 18, 181–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjaerland, F., Khazal, A., Krogstad, E. A., Nordstroem, F. B. G., & Oust, A. (2018). An analysis of bitcoin’s price dynamics. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 11, 63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koop, G., Pesaran, M. H., & Potter, S. M. (1996). Impulse response analysis in nonlinear multivariate models. Journal of Econometrics, 74, 119–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehner, E., Ziegler, J. R., & Carter, L. (2021). A call for second-generation cryptocurrency valuation metrics. In: Research Anthology on Blockchain Technology in Business, Healthcare, Education, and Government (pp. 722–742). IGI Global.

  • Lütkepohl, H. (2005). New introduction to multiple time series analysis. Springer Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nasekin, S., & Chen, C. Y-H. (2018). Deep learning-based cryptocurrency sentiment construction. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 12, 53. Available at SSRN 3310784.

  • Oliveira, L., Zavolokina, L., Bauer, I., & Schwabe, G. (2018). To token or not to token: Tools for understanding blockchain tokens. In: International Conference of Information Systems (ICIS 2018), San Francisco, U.S.A.

  • Petukhina, A., Trimborn, S., Härdle, W. K. & Elendner, H. (2020). Investing with Cryptocurrencies – Evaluating their potential for portfolio allocation strategies. Quantitative Finance https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3274193

  • Phillips, P. C. B., Shi, S., & Yu, J. (2015). Testing for multiple bubbles: Historical episodes of exuberance and collapse in the S &P 500. International Economic Review, 56, 1043–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, P. C. B., Wu, Y., & Yu, J. (2011). Explosive behavior in the 1990s nasdaq: When did exuberance escalate asset values? International Economic Review, 52, 201–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pesaran, H. H., & Shin, Y. (1998). Generalized impulse response analysis in linear multivariate models. Economics Letters, 58, 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saleh, F. (2021). Blockchain without waste: Proof-of-stake. The Review of Financial Studies, 34(3), 1156–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, C. A. (1980). Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica, 48, 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trimborn, S., Li, M., & Härdle, W. K. (2020). Investing with cryptocurrencies–A liquidity constrained investment approach. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 18(2), 280–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yi, S., Xu, Z., & Wang, G. (2018). Volatility connectedness in the cryptocurrency market: Is Bitcoin a dominant cryptocurrency? International Review of Financial Analysis, 60(C), 98–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian M. Hafner.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 3 and 4.

Table 3 The 39 cryptocurrencies with their symbols, market capitalizations (MCs) and rankings by MCs
Table 4 NVT descriptive statistics during the period from 15 November 2018 to 16 February 2021

See Figs. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and Tables 5 and 6.

Fig. 9
figure 9

ACF plots for 9 NVT series

Fig. 10
figure 10

ACF plots of 9 NVT series after removing seasonality

Fig. 11
figure 11

Correlation between different NVT ratios of cryptocurrencies

Fig. 12
figure 12

Estimated coefficients of the VAR(3)-LASSO model

Fig. 13
figure 13

Correlation in the residuals of the estimated VAR-LASSO model

Table 5 Results of the ADF stationarity test, where the critical value 5% is − 2.865
Table 6 P_values for the Ljung-Box test on the residuals of the VAR-LASSO model

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hafner, C.M., Majeri, S. Analysis of cryptocurrency connectedness based on network to transaction volume ratios. Digit Finance (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42521-022-00054-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42521-022-00054-w

Keywords

  • Vector autoregressions
  • ICA
  • LASSO
  • Networks
  • Cryptocurrencies

JEL Classification

  • C14
  • C43
  • Z11