The Co-movement of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland Sovereign Credit Default Swaps Spreads

  • Paweł MiłobędzkiEmail author
  • Sabina Nowak
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


We use a VEC DCC M-GARCH model to investigate the daily co-movement of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland one-, five- and ten-year sovereign credit default swap (CDS) spreads in the period Jan 2009–May 2018. To control for a systemic risk stemming from the EU and other international markets, we nest the analysis within a four-variate system including the Germany CDS spread and the CBOE VIX. The latter serves us as a proxy for the exogenous driver of spreads. The analysis shows that the long-run dependence among the logs of CDS spreads is rare. It is only the Czech Republic and Germany one-year CDS spreads that exhibit a common stochastic trend. The remaining spreads do not co-integrate. Each country maturity time t log change in the spread depends upon that of time \(t - 1\) and earlier. The dynamics of spreads are country specific. The Hungary CDS spreads Granger cause almost all their counterparts. The causality running other way round is incidental. The median of pairwise conditional correlation estimates among the countries of interest differs across the maturities in the way indicating that the Czech, Hungarian and Polish markets are better integrated among one another than any single with the German market.


CDS spreads Price discovery Granger causality VEC DCC M-GARCH 


  1. 1.
    Gündüz, Y., Kaya, O.: Impacts of the financial crisis on eurozone sovereign CDS spreads. J. Int. Money Financ. 49, 425–442 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Butler, A.W., Fauver, L.: Institutional environment and sovereign credit ratings. Financ. Manage. 35(3), 53–79 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Augustin, P., Tédongap, R.: Real economic shocks and sovereign credit risk. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 51(2), 541–587 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aslund, A.: Lessons from reforms in Central and Eastern Europe in the Wake of the Global Financial Crisis. Institute for International Economics Discussion Papers Series, No. WP 12-7 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang, P., Moore, T.: The integration of the credit default swap markets during the US subprime crisis: dynamic correlation analysis. J. Int. Financ. Mark., Inst & Money 22, 1–15 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, Y.-H.C., Härdle, W.K., Pham-Thu, H.: The integration of credit default swap markets in the pre and post-subprime crisis in common stochastic trends. SFB Discussion Paper No. 649 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ho, S.E.: Long and short-runs determinants of the sovereign CDS spread in emerging countries. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 36, 579–590 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pan, J., Singleton, K.J.: Default and recovery implicit in the term structure of sovereign CDS spreads. J. Financ. 63(5), 2345–2384 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Longstaff, F.A., Pan, J., Pedersen, L.H., Singleton, K.J.: How sovereign is sovereign credit risk? Am. Econ. J.: Macroecon. 3(2), 75–103 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fender, I., Hayo, B., Neuenkirch, M.: Daily pricing of emerging market sovereign CDS before and during the global financial crisis. J. Bank. Finance 36, 2786–2794 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clark, E., Kassimatis, K.: Macroeconomic effects on emerging-markets sovereign credit spreads. J. Financ. Stab. 20, 1–13 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fontana, A., Scheicher, M.: An analysis of euro area sovereign CDS and their relation with government bonds. J. Bank. Finance 62, 126–140 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kocsis, Z., Monostori, Z.: The role of country-specific fundamentals in sovereign CDS spreads: Eastern European experiences. Emerg. Mark. Rev. 27, 140–168 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ang, A., Longstaff, F.A.: Systemic sovereign credit risk: lessons from the U.S. and Europe. J. Monet. Econ. 60, 493–510 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Engle, R.F.: Dynamic conditional correlation: a simple class of multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity models. J. Bus. & Econ. Stat. 20, 339–350 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kliber, A.: The dynamics of sovereign credit default swaps and the evolution of the financial crisis in selected Central European Economies. Finance a úvěr-Czech J. Econ. Financ. 64(4), 330–350 (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu, J., Meyer, R.: Multivariate stochastic volatility models: Bayesian estimation and model comparison. Econ. Rev. 25, 361–384 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Forbes, K.J., Rigobon, R.: No contagion, only interdependence: measuring stock market comovements. J. Financ. 57(5), 2223–2261 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Engle, R.F., Granger, C.W.J.: Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55(2), 251–276 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johansen, S.: Estimation and hypothesis testing of cointegration vectors in Gaussian vector autoregressive models. Econometrica 59(6), 1551–1580 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Elliott, G., Rothenberg, T.J., Stock, J.H.: Efficient tests for auto-regressive unit root. Econometrica 64(4), 813–836 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P.C.B., Schmidt, P., Shin, Y.: Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root. J. Econ. 54, 159–178 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lütkepohl, H.: New Introduction to Multiple Time Series Analysis. Springer, Berlin (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hjalmarsson E., Österholm P.: Testing for cointegration using the Johansen methodology when variables are near-integrated. IMF Working Paper No. WP/07/141 (2007)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    MacKinnon, J.G.: Critical values for cointegration tests. Queen’s Economics Department Working Paper No. 1227 (2010)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shin, Y.: A residual-based test of the null of cointegration against the alternative of no cointegration. Econ. Theory 10(1), 91–115 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Econometrics, Faculty of ManagementUniversity of GdańskSopotPoland

Personalised recommendations