Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3539597.3570387acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswsdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Ask "Who", Not "What": Bitcoin Volatility Forecasting with Twitter Data

Published: 27 February 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Understanding the variations in trading price (volatility), and its response to exogenous information, is a well-researched topic in finance. In this study, we focus on finding stable and accurate volatility predictors for a relatively new asset class of cryptocurrencies, in particular Bitcoin, using deep learning representations of public social media data obtained from Twitter. For our experiments, we extracted semantic information and user statistics from over 30 million Bitcoin-related tweets, in conjunction with 15-minute frequency price data over a horizon of 144 days. Using this data, we built several deep learning architectures that utilized different combinations of the gathered information. For each model, we conducted ablation studies to assess the influence of different components and feature sets over the prediction accuracy. We found statistical evidences for the hypotheses that: (i) temporal convolutional networks perform significantly better than both classical autoregressive models and other deep learning-based architectures in the literature, and (ii) tweet author meta-information, even detached from the tweet itself, is a better predictor of volatility than the semantic content and tweet volume statistics. We demonstrate how different information sets gathered from social media can be utilized in different architectures and how they affect the prediction results. As an additional contribution, we make our dataset public for future research.

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (WSDM.mp4)
Presentation of the paper 'Ask "Who", Not "What": Bitcoin Volatility Forecasting with Twitter Data' by M. Eren Akbiyik. Our study used deep learning to find stable and accurate volatility predictors for cryptocurrencies, specifically Bitcoin, using public social media data from Twitter. Using data from over 30 million Bitcoin-related tweets and 15-minute frequency price data, we found that temporal convolutional networks performed better than other models and that tweet author information was a better predictor of volatility than tweet content and volume. The dataset used in the study is also made publicly available for future research.

References

[1]
Michel Rauchs and Garrick Hileman. Global Cryptocurrency Benchmarking Study. Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, 2017.
[2]
Triple-A. Crypto ownership table, 2020.
[3]
Yuexin Mao, Wei Wei, Bing Wang, and Benyuan Liu. Correlating S&P 500 stocks with Twitter data. In Proceedings of the First ACM International Workshop on Hot Topics on Interdisciplinary Social Networks Research, HotSocial '12, page 69--72, New York, NY, USA, 2012. Association for Computing Machinery.
[4]
Svitlana Galeshchuk, O. Vasylchyshyn, and Andriy Krysovatyy. Bitcoin response to Twitter sentiments. In ICTERI Workshops, 2018.
[5]
Ioannis Livieris, Niki Kiriakidou, Stavros Stavroyiannis, and P. Pintelas. An advanced CNN-LSTM model for cryptocurrency forecasting. Electronics, 01 2021.
[6]
Thársis T.P. Souza and Tomaso Aste. Predicting future stock market structure by combining social and financial network information. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 535:122343, Dec 2019.
[7]
Juan Piñeiro, M. López-Cabarcos, Ada M. Pérez-Pico, and Belén Ribeiro-Navarrete. Does social network sentiment influence the relationship between the S&P 500 and gold returns? International Review of Financial Analysis, 57, 02 2018.
[8]
Jia-Yen Huang and Jin-Hao Liu. Using social media mining technology to improve stock price forecast accuracy. Journal of Forecasting, 39(1):104--116, 2020.
[9]
Dehua Shen, Andrew Urquhart, and Pengfei Wang. Does Twitter predict Bitcoin? Economics Letters, 174:118--122, 2019.
[10]
Dibakar Raj Pant, Prasanga Neupane, Anuj Poudel, Anup Kumar Pokhrel, and Bishnu Kumar Lama. Recurrent neural network based bitcoin price prediction by twitter sentiment analysis. In 2018 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Computing, Communication and Security (ICCCS), pages 128--132, 2018.
[11]
Suhwan Ji, Jongmin Kim, and Hyeonseung Im. A comparative study of Bitcoin price prediction using deep learning. Mathematics, 7:898, 09 2019.
[12]
S. Howison, Avraam Rafailidis, and Henrik Rasmussen. On the pricing and hedging of volatility derivatives. Applied Mathematical Finance, 11:317--346, 12 2004.
[13]
Irena Barja?i? and Nino Antulov-Fantulin. Time-varying volatility in bitcoin market and information flow at minute-level frequency. Frontiers in Physics, 9:273, 2021.
[14]
Alla A. Petukhina, Raphael C. G. Reule, and Wolfgang Karl Härdle. Rise of the machines? Intraday high-frequency trading patterns of cryptocurrencies. The European Journal of Finance, 27(1--2):8--30, Jul 2020.
[15]
C. Hutto and Eric Gilbert. Vader: A parsimonious rule-based model for sentiment analysis of social media text. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 8(1):216--225, May 2014.
[16]
HE Stanley and RN Mantegna. An introduction to econophysics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
[17]
Rama Cont. Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues. Quantitative finance, 1(2):223, 2001.
[18]
Robert F Engle. Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of the variance of united kingdom inflation. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 987--1007, 1982.
[19]
Tim Bollerslev. Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. Journal of econometrics, 31(3):307--327, 1986.
[20]
Philippe Jorion. On jump processes in the foreign exchange and stock markets. The Review of Financial Studies, 1(4):427--445, 1988.
[21]
Wing H Chan and John M Maheu. Conditional jump dynamics in stock market returns. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 20(3):377--389, 2002.
[22]
Daniele Mastro. Forecasting realized volatility: Arch-type models vs. the har-rv model. SSRN Electronic Journal, 01 2014.
[23]
Yang Liu. Novel volatility forecasting using deep learning--long short term memory recurrent neural networks. Expert Systems with Applications, 132:99--109, 2019.
[24]
Nghia Nguyen, Minh-Ngoc Tran, David Gunawan, and Robert Kohn. A long short-term memory stochastic volatility model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.02884, 2019.
[25]
Sean McNally, Jason Roche, and Simon Caton. Predicting the price of Bitcoin using machine learning. In 2018 26th euromicro international conference on parallel, distributed and network-based processing (PDP), pages 339--343. IEEE, 2018.
[26]
Muhammad Saad, Jinchun Choi, DaeHun Nyang, Joongheon Kim, and Aziz Mohaisen. Toward characterizing blockchain-based cryptocurrencies for highly accurate predictions. IEEE Systems Journal, 14(1):321--332, 2019.
[27]
Qiutong Guo, Shun Lei, Qing Ye, and Zhiyang Fang. MRC-LSTM: A hybrid approach of multi-scale residual CNN and LSTM to predict Bitcoin price, 2021.
[28]
Andrea Bucci. Realized volatility forecasting with neural networks. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 18(3):502--531, 2020.
[29]
Ajitha Vejendla and David Enke. Evaluation of garch, rnn and fnn models for forecasting volatility in the financial markets. IUP Journal of Financial Risk management, 10(1), 2013.
[30]
Adam Hayes. Cryptocurrency value formation: An empirical analysis leading to a cost of production model for valuing Bitcoin. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015.
[31]
Wilko Bolt. On the value of virtual currencies. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016.
[32]
Saralees Nadarajah and Jeffrey Chu. On the inefficiency of Bitcoin. Economics Letters, 150:6--9, 2017.
[33]
Eng-Tuck Cheah and John Fry. Speculative bubbles in Bitcoin markets? An empirical investigation into the fundamental value of Bitcoin. Economics Letters, 130:32--36, 2015.
[34]
Ladislav and Kristoufek. What are the main drivers of the Bitcoin price? Evidence from wavelet coherence analysis. PloS One, 10(4):e0123923, 2015.
[35]
Thomas Dimpfl and Franziska J Peter. Nothing but noise? price discovery across cryptocurrency exchanges. Journal of Financial Markets, 54:100584, 2021.
[36]
Jonathan Donier and Jean-Philippe Bouchaud. Why do markets crash? Bitcoin data offers unprecedented insights. PloS One, 10:1--11, 2015.
[37]
Paraskevi Katsiampa. Volatility estimation for Bitcoin: A comparison of GARCH models. Economics Letters, 158:3--6, 2017.
[38]
Tian Guo, Albert Bifet, and Nino Antulov-Fantulin. Bitcoin volatility forecasting with a glimpse into buy and sell orders. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM), pages 989--994, Nov 2018.
[39]
Nino Antulov-Fantulin, Tian Guo, and Fabrizio Lillo. Temporal mixture ensemble models for probabilistic forecasting of intraday cryptocurrency volume. Decisions in Economics and Finance, pages 1--36, 2021.
[40]
Dorit Ron and Adi Shamir. Quantitative analysis of the full Bitcoin transaction graph. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 6--24. Springer, 2013.
[41]
Abeer ElBahrawy, Laura Alessandretti, Anne Kandler, Romualdo Pastor-Satorras, and Andrea Baronchelli. Evolutionary dynamics of the cryptocurrency market. Royal Society Open Science, 4(11):170623, 2017.
[42]
Nino Antulov-Fantulin, Dijana Tolic, Matija Piskorec, Zhang Ce, and Irena Vodenska. Inferring short-term volatility indicators from the Bitcoin blockchain. In Complex Networks and Their Applications VII, pages 508--520, Cham, 2019. Springer International Publishing.
[43]
David Garcia and Frank Schweitzer. Social signals and algorithmic trading of Bitcoin. Royal Society Open Science, 2(9):150288, 2015.
[44]
Asim K. Dey, Cuneyt G. Akcora, Yulia R. Gel, and Murat Kantarcioglu. On the role of local blockchain network features in cryptocurrency price formation. Canadian Journal of Statistics, 48(3):561--581, 2020.
[45]
Johannes Beck, Roberta Huang, David Lindner, Tian Guo, Zhang Ce, Dirk Helbing, and Nino Antulov-Fantulin. Sensing social media signals for cryptocurrency news. In Companion proceedings of the 2019 World Wide Web conference, pages 1051--1054, 2019.
[46]
Larry G. Epstein and Martin Schneider. Ambiguity, information quality, and asset pricing. The Journal of Finance, 63(1):197--228, 2008.
[47]
Qi Cao, Huawei Shen, Keting Cen, Wentao Ouyang, and Xueqi Cheng. Deephawkes: Bridging the gap between prediction and understanding of information cascades. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, pages 1149--1158, 2017.
[48]
Hongyuan Mei and Jason M Eisner. The neural hawkes process: A neurally self-modulating multivariate point process. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017.
[49]
James D. Hamilton and Princeton University Press. Time Series Analysis. Number 10. c. in Time Series Analysis. Princeton University Press, 1994.
[50]
Torben G. Andersen, Tim Bollerslev, Francis X. Diebold, and Paul Labys. Modeling and forecasting realized volatility. Econometrica, 71(2):579--625, 2003.
[51]
Shaojie Bai, J Zico Kolter, and Vladlen Koltun. An empirical evaluation of generic convolutional and recurrent networks for sequence modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.01271, 2018.
[52]
Junyoung Chung, Caglar Gulcehre, KyungHyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modelling, 2014.
[53]
Colin Lea, Rene Vidal, Austin Reiter, and Gregory D Hager. Temporal convolutional networks: A unified approach to action segmentation. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 47--54. Springer, 2016.
[54]
Emre Aksan and Otmar Hilliges. STCN: Stochastic temporal convolutional networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.06568, 2019.
[55]
Aaron van den Oord, Sander Dieleman, Heiga Zen, Karen Simonyan, Oriol Vinyals, Alex Graves, Nal Kalchbrenner, Andrew Senior, and Koray Kavukcuoglu. Wavenet: A generative model for raw audio. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.03499, 2016.
[56]
Takuya Akiba, Shotaro Sano, Toshihiko Yanase, Takeru Ohta, and Masanori Koyama. Optuna: A next-generation hyperparameter optimization framework. In Proceedings of the 25rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2019.
[57]
Ilya Loshchilov and Frank Hutter. Decoupled weight decay regularization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05101, 2017.
[58]
Martina Matta, Ilaria Lunesu, and Michele Marchesi. Bitcoin spread prediction using social and web search media. In UMAP workshops, pages 1--10, 2015.
[59]
Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805, 2018.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A SHAP-based controversy analysis through communities on TwitterWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-024-01278-z27:5Online publication date: 14-Sep-2024
  • (2023)PreBit — A multimodal model with Twitter FinBERT embeddings for extreme price movement prediction of BitcoinExpert Systems with Applications: An International Journal10.1016/j.eswa.2023.120838233:COnline publication date: 15-Dec-2023

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
WSDM '23: Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining
February 2023
1345 pages
ISBN:9781450394079
DOI:10.1145/3539597
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 February 2023

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. bitcoin
  2. daily volatility
  3. deep learning
  4. twitter

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • European Union - Horizon 2020 Program

Conference

WSDM '23

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 498 of 2,863 submissions, 17%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)232
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)21
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A SHAP-based controversy analysis through communities on TwitterWorld Wide Web10.1007/s11280-024-01278-z27:5Online publication date: 14-Sep-2024
  • (2023)PreBit — A multimodal model with Twitter FinBERT embeddings for extreme price movement prediction of BitcoinExpert Systems with Applications: An International Journal10.1016/j.eswa.2023.120838233:COnline publication date: 15-Dec-2023

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media