Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine whether the weak form of the efficient market hypothesis (EMH) is valid for the Bitcoin market. To that end, we consider the recent developments in unit root analysis utilizing daily data from February 2, 2012 to November 23, 2018. More specifically, we employ unit root tests with and without sharp breaks and also a unit root test with gradual breaks in order to obtain efficient and unbiased output. Our findings show that the EMH appears to be valid for the Bitcoin market. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of these findings.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bariviera, A. F. (2017). The inefficiency of bitcoin revisited: A dynamic approach. Economics Letters, 161, 1–4.
Bartos, J. (2015). Does bitcoin follow the hypothesis of efficient market? International Journal of Economic Sciences, 4(2), 10–23.
Bitcoinity. (2019). Retrieved January 01, 2019, from https://bitcoinity.org/
Blockchain. (2019). Retrieved January 01, 2019, from https://www.blockchain.com/
Bradbury, D. (2013). The problem with bitcoin. Computer Fraud & Security, 11, 5–8.
Caporale, G. M., Gil-Alana, L., & Plastun, A. (2018). Persistence in the cryptocurrency market. Research in International Business and Finance, 46, 141–148.
Carpenter, A. (2016). Portfolio diversification with bitcoin. Journal of Undergraduate in France, 6(1), 1–27.
Coinmarket. (2019). Retrieved January 03, 2019, from https://coinmarketcap.com/
Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica, 49(4), 1057–1072.
Dwyer, G. P. (2015). The economics of bitcoin and similar private digital currencies. Journal of Financial Stability, 17, 81–91.
ECB. (2012). Virtual currency schemes. Retrieved January 01, 2019, from https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf
ECB. (2015). Virtual currency schemes–a further analysis. Retrieved January 01, 2019, from https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemesen.pdf
Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012a). The flexible Fourier form and Dickey–Fuller type unit root tests. Economics Letters, 117(1), 196–199.
Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012b). A unit root test using a Fourier series to approximate smooth breaks. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(4), 574–599.
Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417.
Guven, V., & Sahinoz, E. (2018). Blokzincir, kripto paralar, bitcoin. İstanbul: Kronik Kitabevi.
Hatemi-J, A. (2012). Asymmetric causality tests with an application. Empirical Economics, 43(1), 447–456.
Jiang, Y., Nie, H., & Ruan, W. (2018). Time-varying long-term memory in bitcoin market. Finance Research Letters, 25, 280–284.
Karadeniz, E., Ozturk, I., & Iskenderoglu, O. (2012). An investigation of efficient market hypothesis in OECD countries. Actual Problems of Economics, 129(3), 398–405.
Kilic, Y., & Cutcu, İ. (2018). Bitcoin Fiyatları ile Borsa İstanbul Endeksi Arasındaki Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik İlişkisi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 13(3), 235–250.
Kocoglu, S., Çevik, Y. E., & Tanrıöven, C. (2016). Bitcoin piyasalarının etkinliği, likiditesi ve oynaklığı. Journal of Business Research Turk-Türk İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 8(2), 77–97.
Kurihara, Y., & Fukushima, A. (2017). The market efficiency of bitcoin: A weekly anomaly perspective. Journal of Applied Finance and Banking, 7(3), 57.
Li, X., & Wang, C. A. (2017). The technology and economic determinants of cryptocurrency exchange rates: The case of bitcoin. Decision Support Systems, 95, 49–60.
Mishkin, F. S. (2004). The economics of money, banking, and financial markets (7th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.
Narayan, P. K., & Popp, S. (2010). A new unit root test with two structural breaks in level and slope at unknown time. Journal of Applied Statistics, 37(9), 1425–1438.
Ozturk, B. M., Arslan, H., Kayhan, T., & Uysal, M. (2018). Yeni bir hedge enstrümanı olarak Bitcoin: Bitconomi. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 217–232.
Sensoy, A. (2018). The inefficiency of bitcoin revisited: A high-frequency analysis with alternative currencies. Finance Research Letters, 28, 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2018.04.002
Teknochain. (2019). Retrieved January 04, 2019, from https://teknochain.com/
Tiwari, A. K., Jana, R. K., Das, D., & Roubaud, D. (2018). Informational efficiency of bitcoin—An extension. Economics Letters, 163, 106–109.
Uzer, B. (2017). Sanal Para Birimleri. Retrieved January 02, 2019, from https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/f4b2db90-7729-4d94-8202-031e98972d0f/Sanal+Para+Birimleri.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-f4b2db90-7729-4d94-8202-031e98972d0f-m3fBagn
Wei, W. C. (2018). Liquidity and market efficiency in cryptocurrencies. Economics Letters, 168, 21–24.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Iltas, Y., Ucler, G., Bulut, U. (2019). Assessment of the Crypto Market Efficiency: Empirical Evidence from Unit Root Tests with Different Approximations. In: Hacioglu, U. (eds) Blockchain Economics and Financial Market Innovation. Contributions to Economics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25275-5_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25275-5_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-25274-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-25275-5
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)