Paper detail

The Efficient Market Hypothesis for Bitcoin in the context of neural networks

This study examines the weak form of the efficient market hypothesis for Bitcoin using a feedforward neural network. Due to the increasing popularity of cryptocurrencies in recent years, the question has arisen, as to whether market inefficiencies could be exploited in Bitcoin. Several studies we refer to here discuss this topic in the context of Bitcoin using either statistical tests or machine learning methods, mostly relying exclusively on data from Bitcoin itself. Results regarding market efficiency vary from study to study. In this study, however, the focus is on applying various asset-related input features in a neural network. The aim is to investigate whether the prediction accuracy improves when adding equity stock indices (S&P 500, Russell 2000), currencies (EURUSD), 10 Year US Treasury Note Yield as well as Gold&Silver producers index (XAU), in addition to using Bitcoin returns as input feature. As expected, the results show that more features lead to higher training performance from 54.6% prediction accuracy with one feature to 61% with six features. On the test set, we observe that with our neural network methodology, adding additional asset classes, no increase in prediction accuracy is achieved. One feature set is able to partially outperform a buy-and-hold strategy, but the performance drops again as soon as another feature is added. This leads us to the partial conclusion that weak market inefficiencies for Bitcoin cannot be detected using neural networks and the given asset classes as input. Therefore, based on this study, we find evidence that the Bitcoin market is efficient in the sense of the efficient market hypothesis during the sample period. We encourage further research in this area, as much depends on the sample period chosen, the input features, the model architecture, and the hyperparameters.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.