Due to recent developments, several countries have given the green light to cryptocurrencies, and big companies now accept them as a payment method. This article aimed to assess the random walk behaviour of the cryptocurrency market by analysing Bitcoin returns. The study observed daily Bitcoin closing prices from January 2016 to December 2023. We employed rigorous statistical tests, including the run test, generalised spectral test, automatic portmanteau test and wild bootstrap automatic variance ratio test. Furthermore, the rolling window technique was used to discern whether market efficiency was time-varying or static, involving dividing the data into four fixed rolling windows. Our overall empirical results revealed that Bitcoin price fluctuations were unpredictable, inferring market efficiency. The findings implied that Bitcoin prices adhered to a random walk pattern, making it challenging to identify abnormal trends in this emerging market.
AggarwalD. (2019). Do bitcoins follow a random walk model?Research in Economics, 73(1), 15–22. 10.1016/j.rie.2019.01.002
2.
Anamika ChakrabortyM., & SubramaniamS. (2023). Does sentiment impact cryptocurrency?Journal of Behavioral Finance, 24(2), 202–218. 10.1080/15427560.2021.1950723
3.
BarivieraA. F. (2017). The inefficiency of Bitcoin revisited: A dynamic approach. Economics Letters, 161, 1–4. 10.1016/j.econlet.2017.09.013
4.
BartosJ. (2015). Does Bitcoin follow the hypothesis of efficient market?International Journal of Economic Sciences, 4(2), 10–23. 10.20472/ES.2015.4.2.002
5.
CampbellJ. Y., LoA. W., MacKinlayA. C., & WhitelawR. F. (1998). The econometrics of financial markets. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 2(4), 559–562.
6.
ChallaM. L., MalepatiV., & KolusuS. N. R. (2020). S&P BSE sensex and S&P BSE IT return forecasting using ARIMA. Financial Innovation, 6(1), 47. 10.1186/s40854-020-00201-5
7.
CharlesA., DarnéO., & KimJ. H. (2012). Exchange-rate return predictability and the adaptive markets hypothesis: Evidence from major foreign exchange rates. Journal of International Money and Finance, 31(6), 1607–1626.
8.
ChoiI. (1999). Testing the random walk hypothesis for real exchange rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 14(3), 293–308.
9.
EscancianoJ. C., & LobatoI. N. (2009). An automatic portmanteau test for serial correlation. Journal of Econometrics, 151(2), 140–149.
10.
EscancianoJ. C., & VelascoC. (2006). Generalized spectral tests for the martingale difference hypothesis. Journal of Econometrics, 134(1), 151–185.
11.
FamaE. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383. 10.2307/2325486
12.
JarqueC. M., & BeraA. K. (1980). Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals. Economics Letters, 6(3), 255–259. 10.1016/0165-1765(80)90024-5
13.
KatsiampaP. (2017). Volatility estimation for Bitcoin: A comparison of GARCH models. Economics Letters, 158, 3–6. 10.1016/j.econlet.2017.06.023
14.
KhuntiaS., & PattanayakJ. K. (2018). Adaptive market hypothesis and evolving predictability of bitcoin. Economics Letters, 167(4), 26–28.
15.
KhuntiaS., & PattanayakJ. K. (2020). Evolving efficiency of exchange rate movement: An evidence from Indian foreign exchange market. Global Business Review, 21(4), 956–969. 10.1177/0972150919856996
16.
KimJ. H. (2009). Automatic variance ratio test under conditional heteroskedasticity. Finance Research Letters, 6(3), 179–185. 10.1016/j.frl.2009.04.003
17.
KuriharaY., & FukushimaA. (2017). The market efficiency of bitcoin: A weekly anomaly perspective. Journal of Applied Finance and Bankin, 7(3), 8.
18.
LimK.-P., LuoW., & KimJ. H. (2013). Are US stock index returns predictable? Evidence from automatic autocorrelation-based tests. Applied Economics, 45(8), 953–962.
19.
LiuL. (2019). Are Bitcon returns predictable?: Evidence from technical indicators. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 533, 121950. 10.1016/j.physa.2019.121950
20.
LoA. W., & MacKinlayA. C. (1989). The size and power of the variance ratio test in finite samples: A Monte Carlo investigation. Journal of Econometrics, 40(2), 203–238.
21.
LupuR., & PopaC. M. (2022). High-frequency market efficiency test for cryptocurrency. In JacquesA. J. (Ed.), 30 years of inspiring academic economic research – From the transition to market economy to the interlinked crises of 21st century (pp. 204–217). Sciendo. 10.2478/9788366675261-015
MalleshaL., & ArchanaH. N. (2023). Impact of Hindenburg research report on the stock prices of Adani group companies: An event study. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 19(1), 40–46.
24.
NadarajahS., & ChuJ. (2017). On the inefficiency of Bitcoin. Economics Letters, 150, 6–9. 10.1016/j.econlet.2016.10.033
25.
PalamalaiS., KumarK. K., & MaityB. (2021). Testing the random walk hypothesis for leading cryptocurrencies. Borsa Istanbul Review, 21(3), 256–268. 10.1016/j.bir.2020.10.006
26.
PathakR., GuptaR. D., TaufembackC. G., & TiwariA. K. (2020). Testing the efficiency of metal’s market: New evidence from a generalised spectral test. Studies in Economics and Finance, 37(2), 311–321. 10.1108/SEF-07-2019-0253
27.
RoyS. (2018). Testing random walk and market efficiency: A cross-stock market analysis. Foreign Trade Review, 53(4), 225–238. 10.1177/0015732518797183
28.
UrasN., MarchesiL., MarchesiM., & TonelliR. (2020). Forecasting Bitcoin closing price series using linear regression and neural networks models. PeerJ Computer Science, 6, e279. 10.7717/peerj-cs.279
29.
UrquhartA. (2016). The inefficiency of Bitcoin. Economics Letters, 148, 80–82. 10.1016/j.econlet.2016.09.019
30.
VermaR., SharmaD., & SamS. (2022). Testing of random walk hypothesis in the cryptocurrency market. FIIB Business Review, 23197145221101238.
31.
WaldA., & WolfowitzJ. (1940). On a test whether two samples are from the same population. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 11(2), 147–162. 10.1214/aoms/1177731909
32.
YuanY., & WangF.-Y. (2018). Blockchain and cryp- tocurrencies: Model, techniques, and applications. IEEE Transactions on systems, man, and cybernetics: Systems, 48(9), 1421–1428.
