Research & Projects

This paper compares the effectiveness of different Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity (GARCH) models in capturing sector-wise volatility in the Indian stock market during COVID-19. The study evaluates the performance of GARCH, EGARCH, and TGARCH models on sectoral indices, assessing their performance in handling extreme market fluctuations. The findings provide insights into the strengths and limitations of each model in handling extreme market fluctuations and offer valuable guidance for investors and policymakers in managing sector-specific risks during crisis periods. The study highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between stock prices and volatility. 

Results

The analysis revealed a leverage effect in stocks, indicating asymmetric volatility, especially in auto stocks. The impact of bad news had a more significant influence on auto stocks. The pandemic led to a significant transformation in stock market returns, with increased prices and increased volatility. The nuanced nature of post-pandemic volatility in auto stocks suggests that investors became more cautious in response to negative news, highlighting the heightened apprehension within the Indian financial market. 

In Fall of 2024, I had the privilege of working alongside three of my classmates at the Centre for Development Studies to present a detailed evaluation of the Indira Awaas Yojana (IAY) report. Guided by the expertise of Prof. Suraj Jacob, we embarked on an in-depth analysis that spanned several key areas:

1. Needs Assessment: We explored the underlying needs that the IAY aimed to address, examining the socioeconomic conditions that shaped the program's inception.

2. Program Choice: Our analysis included a discussion on the rationale behind the choice of IAY as a policy intervention, considering alternative approaches and their potential impacts.

3. Theory of Change: We dissected the program’s theory of change, assessing the logical framework that connects program activities to expected outcomes.

4. Implementation Impact: A critical component of our evaluation focused on how effectively the IAY was implemented, identifying both successes and areas for improvement.

5. Critique: Finally, we offered a balanced critique of the report, highlighting strengths and suggesting areas where the evaluation could be enhanced for greater efficacy.

This collaborative effort was an enriching experience, deepening our understanding of development policy evaluation. The guidance from Prof. Jacob was instrumental in shaping our approach, ensuring that our analysis was both rigorous and insightful.

Through this presentation, we aimed not only to understand the IAY’s impact but also to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on how such programs can be designed and implemented more effectively in the future.