文章基本信息

标题：What do cross-country Bitcoin holdings tell us? Monetary and institutional discontent vs financial development
本地全文：下载
作者：Viktor Koziuk
期刊名称：Investment Management & Financial Innovations
印刷版ISSN：1810-4967
电子版ISSN：1812-9358
出版年度：2022
卷号：19
期号：1
页码：168-185
DOI：10.21511/imfi.19(1).2022.13
语种：English
出版社：LLC “Consulting Publishing Company “Business Perspectives”
摘要：Cryptocurrencies show tremendous growth by market capitalization, however Bitcoin cross-country holdings are still in question. The purpose of the paper is to show that inflation discontent with the rule of law failures can explain why residents of different countries are prone to cryptocurrency holdings. The level of financial development is also considered. A hypothesis is proposed for more complex and segmented motives of Bitcoin holdings, tested by the OLS method. Single- and multi-factor regressions with independent variables are used, which can validate cross-country Bitcoin holdings in terms of inflation discontent, quality of institutions and financial development. Regression results confirm the idea of more segmented motives to hold Bitcoins. First, the hedge against inflation motive is rooted in the institutional weakness of central banks, and the regression results show that inflation variables are the most significant. Second, the hedge against institutional risks of asset ownership motive, based on the lack of rule of law and the relevant variable, is best performing among other institutional variables. Third, it is wrong to neglect financial development. However, it only plays a role in interaction with better innovation performance, meaning that crypto investors try not only to diversify their portfolios, but also to profit from involving in a sector with promising technological perspectives. The main takeaway is that institutional factors help explain why people in countries with worsened inflation and institutional performance tend to hold a large fraction of Bitcoins in assets. Obviously, monetary and institutional fragility is underestimated in the general discussion about the nature of digital money.