The Financialization of Crypto
SSRN, ISSN: 1556-5068
2023
- 1Citations
- 1,821Usage
- 2Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Most Recent News
Publication: Working Paper Series No. 148
“The Financialization of Crypto” by Douglas W. Arner (University of Hongkong), Dirk A. Zetzsche (Université du Luxembourg), Ross P. Buckley (University of New South Wales)
Article Description
Cryptocurrencies, blockchain and decentralized finance were designed to address weaknesses in traditional finance, such as the systemic risk and government profligacy at the heart of many financial crises. Yet, failures of prominent crypto firms highlight the flaws in this argument. Crypto is neither special nor immune and has come to feature all the classic problems of traditional finance. As the crypto ecosystem has evolved, the market failures and externalities of traditional finance have emerged — a process we term the “financialization” of crypto. These include conflict of interests, information asymmetries, centralization and interconnections, large numbers of poorly informed, over-enthusiastic market participants, plus agency, operational and financial risks. We argue that the regulation of crypto needs to learn from the centuries of experience of traditional finance: in order to function properly, crypto requires appropriate regulation and supervision to address market failures and externalities, and to support transparency and efficiency. While it appears the “Crypto Winter” of 2022-2023 has prompted the world’s financial regulators to act, policymakers need to overcome the difficulties posed by decentralization as the underlying paradigm of the crypto industry, which results in a multi-jurisdictional environment of crypto markets, participants, infrastructure and intermediaries. We argue that regulatory systems can (and must) now be instituted to ensure the proper functioning of crypto and its interconnections with traditional finance.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know