Connectedness between DeFi assets and TradFi sectors in emerging Asian markets
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.22(4).2025.07
-
Article InfoVolume 22 2025, Issue #4, pp. 83-94
- 13 Views
-
2 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Abstract
The rise of decentralized finance (DeFi) presents new opportunities for accessing modern financial services. Despite their transformative architecture, most DeFi applications are currently unregulated, which exposes market participants to unforeseen risks. Therefore, understanding the level of connectedness between DeFi and traditional finance (TradFi) is crucial, particularly in emerging Asian markets where the level of cryptocurrency acceptance is high. Applying the time-varying parameter vector autoregressive model, this study examines the return connectedness between leading DeFi assets and traditional financial sectors in Indonesia, India, and Vietnam – the top three countries in Asia for cryptocurrency adoption. By analyzing TradFi at the industry level, this study captures sector-specific spillover dynamics that are essential to the monitoring of systemwide risk. The empirical results reveal low, time-varying return spillovers between DeFi and traditional financial sectors in the selected emerging Asian markets. The emerging financial sectors exhibit stronger linkages with broader traditional market indicators than with DeFi, in which assets interact primarily with each other. Emerging financial sectors and gold are the recipients of return spillovers, and DeFi assets act as the return transmitters. The current low degree of integration between DeFi and TradFi offers policymakers a window of opportunity to develop a robust financial regulatory framework that addresses issues of market stability and consumer protection while promoting the advancement of financial innovation.
Acknowledgments
We thank the editors and anonymous reviewers for their valuable and constructive feedback, which has contributed significantly to improving the quality of this manuscript.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)C32, G15, O33
-
References41
-
Tables3
-
Figures4
-
- Figure 1. Daily returns of DeFi assets and the traditional financial sector
- Figure 2. Dynamic total connectedness
- Figure 3. Net total directional connectedness
- Figure 4. Net pairwise directional connectedness
-
- Table 1. Key indicators of IIV
- Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the data
- Table 3. Averaged dynamic return connectedness
-
- Abakah, E. J. A., Ullah, G. W., Adekoya, O. B., Osei Bonsu, C., & Abdullah, M. (2023). Blockchain market and eco-friendly financial assets: Dynamic price correlation, connectedness and spillovers with portfolio implications. International Review of Economics & Finance, 87, 218-243.
- Ali, S., Ijaz, M. S., & Yousaf, I. (2023). Dynamic spillovers and portfolio risk management between defi and metals: Empirical evidence from the Covid-19. Resources Policy, 83, 103672.
- Antonakakis, N., Chatziantoniou, I., & Gabauer, D. (2020). Refined measures of dynamic connectedness based on time-varying parameter vector autoregressions. Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(4), 1-23.
- Asl, M., & Jabeur, S. (2024). Tail connectedness of DeFi and CeFi with accessible banking pillars: Unveiling novel insights through wavelet and quantile cross-spectral coherence analyses. International Review of Financial Analysis, 95, 103424.
- Auer, R. A. (2022). Embedded supervision: How to build regulation into decentralised finance (CESifo Working Paper No. 9771). CESifo.
- Bennett, D., Mekelburg, E., & Williams, T. H. (2023). BeFi meets DeFi: A behavioral finance approach to decentralized finance asset pricing. Research in International Business and Finance, 65, 101939.
- Bertomeu, J., Martin, X., & Sall, I. (2024). Measuring DeFi risk. Finance Research Letters, 63, 105321.
- Billah, M., Enamul Hoque, M., Hadhri, S., & Do, H. X. (2025). Tail risk connectedness between DeFi and Islamic assets and their determinants. International Review of Economics & Finance, 97, 103789.
- Chainalysis. (2024, September 11). The 2024 Global Crypto Adoption Index: Central & Southern Asia and Oceania (CSAO) region leads the world in terms of global cryptocurrency adoption.
- Cornelli, G., Gambacorta, L., Garratt, R., & Reghezza, A. (2024). Why DeFi lending? Evidence from Aave V2 (BIS Working Paper No. 1183). Bank for International Settlements.
- Diebold, F. X., & Yılmaz, K. (2014). On the network topology of variance decompositions: Measuring the connectedness of financial firms. Journal of Econometrics, 182(1), 119-134.
- Esparcia, C., Fakhfakh, T., Jareño, F., & Ghorbel, A. (2024). Dynamic DeFi-G7 stock markets interactions and their potential role in diversifying and hedging strategies. Financial Innovation, 10(1), 1-26.
- Gabauer, D. (2022). ConnectednessApproach (Version 1.0.0) [R package].
- Ghosh, I., Alfaro-Cortés, E., Gámez, M., & García-Rubio, N. (2023). Prediction and interpretation of daily NFT and DeFi prices dynamics: Inspection through ensemble machine learning & XAI. International Review of Financial Analysis, 87.
- Gök, R. (2025). Spillovers between cryptocurrency, DeFi, carbon, and energy markets: A frequency quantile-on-quantile perspective. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 100, 101954.
- Grassi, L., Lanfranchi, D., Faes, A., & Renga, F. M. (2022). Do we still need financial intermediation? The case of decentralized finance – DeFi. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 19(3), 323-347.
- Grobys, K., Ahmed, S., & Sapkota, N. (2020). Technical trading rules in the cryptocurrency market. Finance Research Letters, 32.
- Gunay, S., Goodell, J. W., Muhammed, S., & Kirimhan, D. (2023). Frequency connectedness between FinTech, NFT and DeFi: Considering linkages to investor sentiment. International Review of Financial Analysis, 90, 102925.
- Harvey, C., Ramachandran, A., Santoro, J., Ehrsam, F., & Buterin, V. (2021). DeFi and the Future of Finance. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
- Koop, G., Pesaran, M. H., & Potter, S. M. (1996). Impulse Response Analysis in Nonlinear Multivariate Models. Journal of Econometrics, 74(1), 119-147.
- Mensi, W., Gubareva, M., & Kang, S. H. (2024). Frequency connectedness between DeFi and cryptocurrency markets. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 93, 12-27.
- Nekhili, R., Alomari, M., Mensi, W., & Sultan, J. (2024). Return spillovers between decentralized finance and centralized finance markets. Eurasian Economic Review.
- Nguyen, L. T. M., & Nguyen, P. T. (2024). Determinants of cryptocurrency and decentralized finance adoption - A configurational exploration. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 201, 123244.
- Nguyen, T. L., Sipko, J., & Pham, V. K. (2025). Cryptocurrency in Vietnam: A deep dive into adoption factors and their interactions. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 11(1), 100501.
- OECD. (2022). Institutionalisation of crypto-assets and DeFi – TradFi interconnectedness. OECD Business and Finance Policy Papers, 1. Paris: OECD Publishing.
- OECD. (2024). The Limits of DeFi for Financial Inclusion: Lessons from ASEAN. Paris: OECD Publishing.
- Ozili, P. K. (2022). Decentralized finance research and developments around the world. Journal of Banking and Financial Technology, 6(2), 117-133.
- Parrondo, L., & Sala, C. (2025). Connectedness between traditional finance, cryptocurrencies and DeFi in the post COVID period. Finance Research Letters, 76, 106897.
- Pesaran, H. H., & Shin, Y. (1998). Generalized impulse response analysis in linear multivariate models. Economics Letters, 58(1), 17-29.
- Schär, F. (2021). Decentralized finance: On blockchain- and smart contract-based financial markets. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, 103(2).
- Sergio, I., & Wedemeier, J. (2025). Global surge: exploring cryptocurrency adoption with evidence from spatial models. Financial Innovation, 11, 96.
- Statista. (2025). DeFi – Worldwide. Statista.
- Ugolini, A., Reboredo, J. C., & Mensi, W. (2023). Connectedness between DeFi, cryptocurrency, stock, and safe-haven assets. Finance Research Letters, 53, 103692.
- Umar, Z., Polat, O., Choi, S.-Y., & Teplova, T. (2022). Dynamic connectedness between non-fungible tokens, decentralized finance, and conventional financial assets in a time-frequency framework. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 76, 101876.
- Waghmare, A. (2025, February 5). Access to banking. Data For India.
- World Bank. (2025, January 27). Financial inclusion overview. World Bank.
- Younis, I., Gupta, H., Du, A. M., Shah, W. U., & Hanif, W. (2024). Spillover dynamics in DeFi, G7 banks, and equity markets during global crises: A TVP-VAR analysis. Research in International Business and Finance, 70, 102405.
- Yousaf, I., & Yarovaya, L. (2022). Static and dynamic connectedness between NFTs, Defi and other assets: Portfolio implication. Global Finance Journal, 53.
- Yousaf, I., Jareño, F., & Esparcia, C. (2022). Tail connectedness between lending/borrowing tokens and commercial bank stocks. International Review of Financial Analysis, 84, 102417.
- Yousaf, I., Jareño, F., & Tolentino, M. (2023). Connectedness between Defi assets and equity markets during COVID-19: A sector analysis. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 187, 122174.
- Zetzsche, D. A., Arner, D. W., & Buckley, R. P. (2020). Decentralized Finance. Journal of Financial Regulation, 6(2), 172-203.