<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection>
<dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:invenio="http://invenio-software.org/elements/1.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><dc:identifier>doi:10.1016/j.mulfin.2025.100944</dc:identifier><dc:language>eng</dc:language><dc:creator>Ferreruela, Sandra</dc:creator><dc:creator>Martín, Daniel</dc:creator><dc:title>Informed trading, investor beliefs consensus and volatility: Evidence from the Limit Order Book dynamics during COVID-19 and short-selling ban</dc:title><dc:identifier>ART-2025-146949</dc:identifier><dc:description>This study investigates the relationship between short-horizon volatility and two distinct sources of microstructural information: executed order flow, measured by VPIN, and the latent order book structure, proxied by its SLOPE. While VPIN captures the realized trade imbalances, SLOPE acts as a proxy for aggregated "belief consensus." The objective is to systematically compare the relative importance of these mechanisms—realized flow versus latent consensus—as drivers and predictors of market volatility. Using tick-by-tick data and the full limit order book for 32 IBEX-35 constituents during the 2019–2020 period, we employ a multifaceted econometric approach in event-time (volume clock), combining stock-level regressions with random-effects meta-analysis, robust fixed-effects panels (Driscoll–Kraay), conditional-probability tables (CPTs), and stock-level VARs with Granger tests and meta-IRFs. Three main results emerge. First, we find that informed trading has a dual role: it helps build belief consensus in the book (H1a) while simultaneously consuming internal liquidity (depth) (H1b). Second, and most critically, belief consensus is a markedly superior predictor of subsequent volatility than VPIN; Conditional Probability Tables confirm that a high degree of consensus sharply increases the probability of the lowest-volatility state (H2). Third, VAR analysis reveals a unanimous, bidirectional, yet asymmetric loop: belief consensus robustly reduces volatility, while volatility, in turn, erodes consensus (H3). The causal links for VPIN, in contrast, are sporadic and size-dependent. Our results establish a new informational channel, demonstrating that the market's latent belief structure is a more potent and reliable determinant of short-term risk than the realized toxicity of order flow.</dc:description><dc:date>2025</dc:date><dc:source>http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/165229</dc:source><dc:doi>10.1016/j.mulfin.2025.100944</dc:doi><dc:identifier>http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/165229</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>oai:zaguan.unizar.es:165229</dc:identifier><dc:relation>info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/DGA/S11-23R</dc:relation><dc:relation>info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/MICINN PID2022-136818NB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033</dc:relation><dc:identifier.citation>Journal of Multinational Financial Management 81 (2025), 100944 [25 pp.]</dc:identifier.citation><dc:rights>by-nc-nd</dc:rights><dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es</dc:rights><dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights></dc:dc>

</collection>