International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration

Volume 12, Issue 1, November 2025, Pages 15-24

---

Modelling the Relationship between Oil Price and Stock Markets in Net Oil-Exporting and Net Oil-Importing Countries: A Panel Data Approach

DOI: 10.18775/ijmsba.1849-5664-5419.2014.XX.100X
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.18775/ijmsba.1849-5664-5419.2014.XX.100X

Izuchukwu Oji-Okoro ^{1, 2*}, Seyi Saint Akadiri ¹, Job Collins Egila ^{1, 3}, Godiya John ⁴

¹Central Bank of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria.

² West African Monetary Agency, Freetown, Sierra Leone.

³Department of Political Science, Nigeria Defence Academy, Kaduna, Nigeria.

⁴Department of Economics, Kaduna University, Kaduna, Nigeria.

Abstract: This study examines the relationship between oil price fluctuations and stock market performance in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing nations from March 2001 to December 2024. Using a panel data approach with static and dynamic models, we analyse five oil-exporting countries (Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Indonesia) and seven oil-importing countries (Japan, Australia, the USA, the UK, Argentina, South Korea, and France). The results reveal a positive and significant correlation between oil prices and stock returns in oil-exporting countries. In contrast, oil-importing countries experience more mixed effects, including negative impacts resulting from rising production costs. These findings suggest that oil-exporting countries should diversify their economies to reduce reliance on oil revenues. At the same time, oil-importing nations should adopt strategies to manage rising production costs, such as investing in alternative energy. These insights provide critical guidance for policymakers and investors in mitigating risks from oil price volatility.

Keywords: Oil price volatility; Stock market returns; Net oil-exporting countries; Net oil-importing countries; Panel data analysis

1. Introduction

The correlation between oil prices and stock market performance attracted sustained scholarly attention from economists, financial analysts, and policymakers. However, the existing literature predominantly concentrated on the relationship within individual countries or specific regions, overlooking the nuanced dynamics in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries. This study fills this research gap by employing a panel data approach static and dynamic approach.

The significance of studying the relationship between oil prices and stock markets in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries arises from their unique economic structures and interdependencies. Net oil-exporting countries heavily rely on oil revenues, which shape their fiscal policies, trade balances, and overall economic performance. Meanwhile, net oil-importing countries face challenges such as increased production costs and potential inflationary pressures when oil prices rise. Furthermore, it is imperative to note, that the impact of oil price fluctuations on stock market performance is vital for both types of countries.

In this study, we adopt a panel data approach, which enable for the inclusion of a broad sample of net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries, thereby capturing heterogeneity across countries and controlling for time-varying factors. By combining the country-specific effects and time-series data, we aim to comprehensively analyse the relationship between oil prices and stock markets.

Therefore, the research objective is to empirically examine the oil price changes on stock market returns in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries. To achieve our research goals, we applied several econometric methods, such as fixed and random effects models, to estimate the relationship between oil prices and stock market performance.

The outcomes of our analysis are expected to contribute to both academic and practical realms. Understanding the relationship between oil prices and stock markets in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries can provide relevant insights for policymakers, investors, and key economic stakeholders. The results may contribute to the formulation of appropriate policy measures, risk management strategies, and investment decisions in the context of volatile energy markets.

2. Literature review

There is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding the nature of the connection between fluctuations in oil prices and the overall performance of stock markets. Nevertheless, the outcomes appear to lean more towards a pessimistic correlation (as indicated by Managi and Okimoto in 2013). Conversely, proponents of a positive relationship include Narayan and Narayan (2010), Zhu et al. (2014, 2017), Hatemi-J et al. (2017), and Silvapulle et al. (2017). Narayan and Narayan (2010) studied the impact of oil price shifts on stock prices within the Vietnam market during the period 2000–2008. Alongside confirming the existence of a prolonged association between the two, they also determined that changes in oil prices led to an increase in stock prices. The authors attribute this unexpected outcome to two distinctive factors: a heightened influx of foreign portfolio investment and a shift in the preferences of local market participants. Similarly, Zhu et al. (2014) investigated the dynamic interdependence between movements in crude oil prices and the stock markets of ten Asia-Pacific nations spanning from 2000 to 2012. Their findings suggest a predominantly weakly positive relationship before the global financial crisis, which transforms into a strongly positive relationship in the post-crisis period.

Zhu et al. (2017) analyse the impact of alterations in oil prices on the returns of stocks within a selection of countries categorized as either oil-exporting or oil-importing. The investigation spans the years from 1997 to 2015. The findings of this study reveal that instances of positive collective shocks in oil prices have the potential to generate an increase in stock returns. The authors, however, specify that this phenomenon materialises exclusively in cases where the oil price shock stems from demand-related shocks.

Silvapulle et al. (2017) examined the enduring connection between shifts in oil prices and the stock markets of major oil-importing nations, analyzing the time frame spanning from 1999 to 2015. Their analysis uncovers evidence that establishes a favorable correlation between fluctuations in oil prices and stock indices, with this relationship being particularly prominent in periods after the global financial crisis. The authors interpret this observation as indicative of a fundamental shift in the behavior of the interrelationship between oil prices and stock markets.

In a similar vein, Hatemi-J et al. (2017) explore the causal between oil prices and the stock markets of the G7 nations over the period from 1975 to 2013. The overarching conclusion derived from their investigation highlights that ascending oil prices lead to a corresponding increase in stock prices. The authors interpret this phenomenon as an indicator that stock markets within these nations perceive rising oil prices as favorable news, potentially reflecting a positive economic outlook.

Other researchers who have presented findings either indicating no relationship or displaying mixed relationships encompass Huang et al. (1996), Cong et al. (2008), Apergis and Miller (2009), and Miller and Ratti (2009). Huang et al. (1996) investigate the dynamic connections between changes in oil prices and stock prices in the United States. Their ultimate observation is that variations in oil returns are not correlated with shifts in stock market returns, except in the instance of returns associated with oil companies. Hence, the authors assert that scant evidence exists to substantiate the often-cited economic significance of oil. They propose that oil futures might serve as a viable instrument for diversifying stock portfolios.

Similarly, Cong et al. (2008) examine the interplay between alterations in oil prices and the Chinese stock market from 1996 to 2007. The central finding of their analysis is that shocks to oil prices primarily exert minimal influence on stock returns within the country. Turning to the research of Apergis and Miller (2009), they direct their attention towards scrutinizing the repercussions of fluctuations in oil prices on the returns of stocks across eight distinct countries. The outcomes of their investigation indicate that the reaction of stock returns to abrupt movements in oil prices remains relatively subdued.

In a different context, Miller and Ratti (2009) explore the prolonged connection between fluctuations in global crude prices and international stock markets from 1971 to 2008. Their findings unveil a negative relationship during the time intervals of 1971–1980 and 1988–1999. In contrast, the connection is found to be statistically insignificant between 1980 and 1988. Managi and Okimoto (2013) propose that the correlation between oil prices and stock performance is contingent on the specific sector being considered. In resource-dependent economies, macroeconomic variables are also strongly influenced by commodity price dynamics. For instance, Musa et al. (2024) show that exchange rate movements in Nigeria are closely linked to the country’s mono-resource structure, highlighting the broader macro-financial effects of oil dependence. Similarly, Peace et al. (2016) find that exchange rate fluctuations significantly influence tourism sector output in Nigeria, further illustrating how macroeconomic volatility can affect sectoral economic performance. Unlike various sectors, where the effects of oil price fluctuations are not as pronounced, oil price movements exert a direct influence on stock returns within the oil and gas sector (Ramos and Veiga, 2011). This phenomenon stems from the fact that oil not only constitutes the primary output of this sector but also serves as a primary input in numerous production processes. Furthermore, various sectors of the economy, such as automobiles, chemicals, manufacturing, and transportation, rely heavily on the oil output generated by the oil sector. As a result, elevated oil prices frequently lead to increased profit margins for oil companies, subsequently enhancing their value within the stock market.

Within this context, existing studies that focus on specific sectors can be classified into three categories. The first group of studies indicates a positive relationship between oil prices and the returns of companies within the oil and gas industry. For instance, Sadorsky (2001) and Boye and Filion (2007) ascertain that rising oil prices correspond to heightened stock returns for oil and gas firms in Canada. A similar outcome is found by El-Sharif et al. (2005) for the UK market. Nandha and Faff (2008) observe that, aside from the mining and oil and gas industries, rising oil prices negatively impact other sectors. Li et al. (2017) demonstrate that Chinese firms within the oil industrial chain experience positive effects on their returns from oil price increases. Similarly, Akdeniz et al. (2021) discover that during the COVID-19 pandemic, oil prices drove higher returns within the oil and gas sector.

A second cluster of studies suggests that the relationship is predominantly negative for industries where oil comprises a significant proportion of production costs. Nandha and Faff (2008) highlight that the transport sector's returns respond unfavourably to oil price hikes. Similarly, Faff and Brailsford (1999) reveal that the Australian transport sector's stock prices exhibit a negative sensitivity to increased oil prices. Cameron and Schnusenberg (2009), as well as Aggarwal et al. (2012), document the adverse impact of oil price increases on transportation firms' returns. According to Özkan (2023), higher oil prices triggered by demand shocks specific to the oil industry do not lead to improved stock returns in the oil and gas sector.

The existing literature has extensively addressed the broader relationship between the stock market and oil prices, with a lesser emphasis on differences between oil-exporting and oil-importing economies. In addition, recent studies highlight the growing role of financial mechanisms in influencing market behaviour. For instance, Gu et al. (2023) show that access to green finance can shape investment and consumption decisions, underscoring the broader influence of financial systems on economic outcomes. Similarly, Ostic et al. (2025) demonstrate that leadership experience and environmental institutional pressures can significantly stimulate eco-innovation and responsible production practices.

Filling this gap in the literature constitutes the primary focus of this study. This article contributes to the existing body of knowledge by concentrating on the relationship between oil prices and stock markets in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries.

3. Research Methodology and Data

3.1 Data and Source

The paper employed balanced data collected from World Development Indicators (WDI) on monthly Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) prices and stock prices ranging from March 2001 to December 2024 from five net oil-exporters including Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Indonesia with a sample size of 6797. The net oil-importing countries are Japan, Australia, the United States of America (USA), the United Kingdom (UK), Argentina, South Korea, and France with a total observation of 10647. Countries were classified according to their dominant oil trade position during most of the sample period, consistent with classifications commonly used in energy-economics studies. Although the study period spans March 2001 to December 2024, some observations were unavailable for certain countries, resulting in an unbalanced panel dataset.

3.2 Model Specification and Estimation Techniques

This study adopts a panel data approach to establish the relationship between oil prices and stock markets in net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries. According to Wooldridge (2002), Panel data methods are the appropriate econometric techniques used to estimate parameters, estimate partial effects of interest in nonlinear models, measure dynamic relationships, and make correct inferences when data are available on repeated cross-sections. The paper notes that panel data allows for systematic, unobserved differences across units that can be correlated with observed factors to be measured unlike in the case of cross-sectional data analysis.

Kunst (2011) contends that the merit of panel analysis over typical time-series analysis lies in the larger sample size, noting that additional information may imply an increase in the degrees of freedom for estimating model parameters and for conducting hypothesis tests. Furthermore, panels with individual dimensions are generally more informative than aggregate time series (Baltagi, 2005). Panel data analysis can be categorized into Static Panel data and Dynamic Panel data. The static analysis establishes the long-run relationship between the variables of interest, while the dynamic measures the short-run association.

3.3 Model Specification

Exploratory analysis indicates that the data is not normally distributed and skewed with a heavy tail towards the right. The study, therefore, applied both static and dynamic panel data analyses. Regarding static, the paper performed pooled regression (PR-OLS estimator), fixed effects (FE-Within Estimator), and random effects (RE) uses Quasi Demeaning Generalized Least Square (GLS) & Maximum Likelihood (ML) estimators. Prior to estimation, stationarity tests were conducted to examine the time-series properties of the variables. In addition, heteroskedasticity-robust standard errors were employed to account for possible serial correlation and heterogeneity across panel units.

3.3.1 Static panel data analyses

The pooled regression model can be specified as:

𝑦_𝑖,𝑡 = 𝛼 + 𝛽𝑥_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝜀_𝑖,𝑡      (1),

Where 𝑦_𝑖𝑡 represents stock market returns for country 𝑖at time 𝑡, while 𝑥_𝑖𝑡 represents the oil price variables measured by Brent crude and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) prices. 𝛼, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝛽 are the parameters to be estimated, 𝜀 is a white noise. 𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑁; 𝑡 = 1, … , 𝑇 with i signifying country i and t representing time t. Pooled regression assumes that common parameters, i.e. regression parameters remain constant across individual countries (Kunts, 2011).

3.3.2 Fixed effects model

Relaxing the restrictive assumption of common parameters, (1) becomes

𝑦_𝑖,𝑡 = 𝛼 + 𝛽𝑥_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝜇_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝜀_𝑖,𝑡      (2)

Where 𝜇 reflects the individual country’s characteristics.

3.3.3 Random effects model

The random effects model is stated as:

𝑦_𝑖,𝑡 = 𝛼 + 𝛽𝑥_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝜇_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝑣_𝑖,𝑡      (3)

𝜀_𝑖,𝑡 = 𝜇_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝑣_𝑖,𝑡      (4)

𝑣_𝑖,𝑡 is assumed to be white noise.

3.4 Dynamic panel data analyses

To investigate the long-run relationship between oil prices and stock market returns, this paper conducted a dynamic panel analysis, both system and differenced approaches. The dynamic specification is estimated using the system-GMM framework, which helps address potential endogeneity associated with lagged dependent variables. A dynamic panel model can be specified as:

𝑦_𝑖,𝑡 = 𝛼 + 𝜔𝑦_{𝑖,𝑡−1} + 𝛽𝑥_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝜇_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝑣_𝑖,𝑡      (5)

Where 𝜀_𝑖,𝑡 = 𝜇_𝑖,𝑡 + 𝑣_𝑖,𝑡      (6)

The study follows Jung (2005) where 𝜀𝑖,𝑡 = 𝜇𝑖,𝑡 + 𝑣𝑖,𝑡 is assumed to have a typical one-way error component construction where:

𝐸_(𝜇𝑖) = 𝐸_{(𝑣𝑖,𝑡 )} = 𝐸_{(𝜇𝑖𝑣𝑖,𝑡 )} = 0      (7)

With the introduction of the first lag of the dependent variable, 𝑦_{𝑖,𝑡−1} , we encounter the problem of autocorrelation, and the OLS estimator becomes biased and inconsistent. This is because the assumption of 𝐸[𝑦_𝑖,𝑡 , 𝜀_𝑖,𝑡 ] = 0 no longer holds and 𝐸[𝑦_𝑖,𝑡 , 𝜀_𝑖,𝑡 ] ≠ 0. Here, the fixed effect or the Within estimator is valid only with large sample size (Sevestre and Trognon,1985). Dynamic panel data are system panel and differenced panel data. The resolution of this problem would require the inclusion of instrumental variables that are not correlated with the stochastic term.

4. Results and Discussion

This chapter discusses the estimation process and results. The paper first performed preliminary analyses to understand the nature of the data. The rest of this chapter is organised as follows: Chapter 4.2 discusses the results of the static panel analyses for both net oil exporting and net oil importing countries and follows it up with Chapter 4.3, which considers the dynamic analyses for the sub-groups involved in oil trade. The chapter concludes by summarising the core empirical results.

4.1 Preliminary Analysis

4.1.1 Descriptive Statistics for Net Oil Exporting Countries

Table 4.1.1 presents the descriptive statistics for the data set on net oil exporting countries. Results show that the mean prices for Brent crude, WTI, and stock are 66.02, 63.85, and 9911.70, respectively. The mean values show the average price of the variables over the sample period. The median values of Brent, WTI, and stock are 62.28, 62.94, and 6863.59 in that order. The median value signifies the central value of the data, and the fact that the mean values are different from the median values indicates that the data is not symmetrical but skewed. Furthermore, the maximum and minimum values for Brent, WTI, and stock are (133.90, 18.60), (139.96, 19.46), and (65075.02, 358.23), respectively. Further, the standard deviation values of 32.68, 28.54, and 10527.76 for Brent, WTI, and stock show how dispersed the observed values are around their mean. Both the means and the medians lying within the range of the data implies that the data is consistent. The Jarque–Bera statistics indicate that the variables deviate from a normal distribution. Total observations are 970.

Table 4.1.1: Summary Statistics of Net Oil Exporting Countries

	BRENT	WTI	STOCK
Mean	66.65	64.41	4848.10
Median	62.56	64.90	4156.75
Maximum	133.90	139.96	20585.24
Minimum	18.60	19.46	202.45
Std. Dev.	32.73	28.56	3881.84
Skewness	0.23	0.15	1.47
Kurtosis	1.73	1.90	5.25
Jarque-Bera	116.21	82.51	872.19
Observations	1520	1520	1520

Note: Standard errors in parentheses. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

4.2 Static panel data analysis

4.2.1 Static Panel Data Analysis for Net Oil Exporting Countries

The output of the static panel data analysis is reported in Table 4.2.1. The regression results evaluate the impact of oil price movements (WTI and Brent) on stock market returns across oil-exporting countries. rwti and rbrent represent oil price changes derived from the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) and Brent crude oil benchmarks. POLS, FE, and RE denote the pooled regression, fixed-effects, and random-effects estimators, respectively. The results show that the coefficients on WTI and Brent in the pooled regression, fixed-effects, and random-effects models are all positive and significant at the 1 percent level. Being positive also implies that an increase in the price of WTI or Brent will lead to a rise in stock market returns in net oil-exporting countries in the long run. In this context, the estimated coefficients indicate the sensitivity of stock returns to changes in oil prices rather than changes in oil prices themselves. This outcome confirms the findings of Hammoudeh and Li (2005). The paper conducted a study on the Norwegian and Mexican stock markets. The study notes that an increase in oil prices has a positive impact on stock markets in oil-exporting countries. Bjørnland (2009), Basher et al. (2018), and Zhang and Asche (2014) all found a similar positive correlation between stock markets and oil prices in oil-exporting countries.

Park (2010) explains that fixed effects consider the individual time or group to have different intercepts in the regression equation. Random effects, on the other hand, assume that individual times or groups have different stochastic terms. Thus, fixed effects say that the individual characteristics are relevant and therefore should be included in the regression equation as observable regressors, while random effects maintain that the individual characteristics, although relevant, are not observable and should be considered as part of the stochastic term. To have both FE and RE significant for WTI and Brent requires that further tests are carried out to determine which model best fits the data under consideration. As such, the study performed the Hausman test to select the appropriate model. The test result shows a Hausman coefficient of 0.000 and a p-value of 1.000. Against the hypotheses:

Ho: There is random effect

H1: There is fixed effect,

We failed to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the appropriate model for this data is random effect. This means that irrespective of the oil type, price increase will positively affect the stock market in net oil-exporting countries.

The results from a static panel data analysis use three estimation techniques: Pooled Ordinary Least Squares (POLS), Fixed Effects (FE), and Random Effects (RE). The results for each technique are reported for both WTI and BRENT prices as dependent variables, with a panel dataset consisting of 965 observations from five countries. The key independent variable in this analysis is the ratio of WTI to BRENT prices (rwti/rbrent). Across all three models (POLS, FE, and RE), the coefficient of the rwti/rbrent variable is positive and highly significant at the 1% level for both WTI and BRENT prices. For the WTI models, the coefficient of rwti/rbrent is 0.220 (POLS, FE, and RE), implying that a one-unit increase in oil prices is associated with a 0.220 increase in stock market returns in oil-exporting countries. Similarly, for the BRENT models, the coefficient is 0.191, indicating that a unit increase in the rwti/rbrent ratio is associated with a 0.191 unit increase in BRENT prices.

Table 4.2.1 Results of Static Panel Data Analysis for Net Oil Exporting Countries

	WTI (rwti)			BRENT (rbrent)
VARIABLES	POLS	FE	RE	POLS	FE	RE
rwti/rbrent	0.220***	0.220***	0.220***	0.191***	0.191***	0.191***
	(0.0224)	(0.0224)	(0.0224)	(0.0233)	(0.0234)	(0.0233)
Constant	0.785***	0.785***	0.785***	0.804***	0.804***	0.804***
	(0.214)	(0.214)	(0.214)	(0.217)	(0.217)	(0.217)
Observations	965	965	965	965	965	965
R-squared	0.091	0.091		0.065	0.065
Country effect	NO	YES	YES	NO	YES	YES
year effect	NO	NO	NO	NO	NO	NO
rmse	6.634	6.645	6.634	6.729	6.740	6.729
F-test	96.64	96.34		66.88	66.67
Prob > F	0	0		0	0
Number of countryid		5	5		5	5
F-test(u_i=0)		0.246			0.239
Prob > F(u_i=0)		0.912			0.916
chi-squared			96.64			66.88
Prob > chi2			0.000			0.000
chi-square (01)			0.000			0.000
Prob > chi2			1.000			1.000
Hausman			0.000			0.000
Prob > chi2			1.000			1.000

Source: Authors Computation

These results suggest that changes in the ratio between WTI and BRENT prices are strongly correlated with movements in both oil price benchmarks. Furthermore, the consistency of these coefficients across the POLS, FE, and RE models implies that the relationship is robust to the different estimation techniques employed. The overall fit of the models, as measured by the R-squared, is relatively low. The R-squared value is 0.091 for the WTI models and 0.065 for the BRENT models, indicating that the rwti/rbrent variable explains only about 9.1% of the variation in WTI prices and 6.5% of the variation in BRENT prices. While these values are modest, they are not unexpected in economic models where price movements are influenced by a multitude of factors beyond the scope of this analysis.

The statistical significance of the models is confirmed by the F-test results, which indicate that the models are highly significant as a whole (Prob > F = 0.000). This demonstrates that the explanatory variable (rwti/rbrent) significantly contributes to explaining variations in WTI and BRENT prices, even if the overall explanatory power of the model is limited. The Fixed Effects (FE) and Random Effects (RE) models account for potential unobservable heterogeneity across countries. However, the F-test for country-specific effects (F-test(u_i=0)) yields p-values of 0.912 for WTI and 0.916 for BRENT, suggesting that these effects are not statistically significant. This suggests that the variations across countries do not significantly influence the relationship between WTI and BRENT prices in the dataset.

The Hausman test, which compares the FE and RE models, has a p-value of 1.000, indicating no significant difference between the two models. This indicates that the Random Effects (RE) model is appropriate for this dataset, as it assumes that any unobserved individual effects are uncorrelated with the explanatory variables.

The RMSE values for the WTI models are approximately 6.63, and for the BRENT models, around 6.73. These values provide an estimate of the average prediction error of the models, with lower values indicating better predictive accuracy. The close RMSE values across the three estimation methods further confirm the robustness of the relationship between the rwti/rbrent ratio and oil prices.The results of this analysis indicate a statistically significant and positive relationship between the WTI to BRENT price ratio (rwti/rbrent) and the levels of WTI and BRENT prices. The estimated coefficients show that WTI prices are slightly more sensitive to changes in the ratio than BRENT prices. Despite the statistical significance of the models, the relatively low R-squared values suggest that additional factors not included in the models may play a significant role in determining oil price movements.

Furthermore, country-specific effects were found to be insignificant, and the Hausman test supports the application of the Random Effects model. Given these findings, future research could explore other potential determinants of oil prices, such as macroeconomic factors, geopolitical events, and supply-demand dynamics, to further enhance the explanatory power of the models.

5. Conclusion

This study highlights the significant relationship between oil price fluctuations and stock market performance in both net oil-exporting and net oil-importing countries. Using a panel data approach, we find that oil-exporting countries experience a positive correlation between rising oil prices and stock market returns, driven by their economic dependence on oil revenues. In contrast, oil-importing countries exhibit mixed responses, where rising oil prices tend to increase production costs, negatively impacting stock market returns in some cases. The findings underscore the complex dynamics of the oil-stock market nexus, varying significantly based on a country's oil dependency status. We recommend that for the oil-exporting countries, policymakers should prioritize economic diversification to reduce vulnerability to oil price volatility. Investment in non-oil sectors can buffer economies from sharp declines in oil prices and ensure more stable stock market performance. Furthermore, implementing counter-cyclical fiscal policies, such as sovereign wealth funds or stabilization funds, can help manage revenue fluctuations from oil price swings and stabilize financial markets. On the other hand, for oil-importing countries, policymakers should focus on reducing dependence on imported oil by promoting energy efficiency and investing in alternative energy sources. This strategy would mitigate the negative impacts of oil price increases on production costs and inflation, also governments and industries should explore hedging strategies to protect against oil price shocks, thereby minimizing adverse effects on stock market performance and overall economic stability.

References

• Aggarwal R, Akhigbe A, Mohanty SK (2012) Oil price shocks and transportation firm asset prices. Energy Economics 34(5):1370–1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2012.05.001
• Akdeniz C, Catik AN, Kişla GH (2021) The impact of oil prices on oil-gas stock returns: a fresh evidence from the COVID-affected countries. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research 55(3):221–236. https://doi.org/10.24818/18423264/55.3.21.14
• Apergis N, Miller SM (2009) Do structural oil-market shocks affect stock prices? Energy Economics 31(4):569–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.03.001
• Baltagi B (2005) Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, 3rd Edition.
• Boye MM, Filion D (2007) Common and fundamental factors in stock returns of Canadian oil and gas companies. Energy Economics 29(3):428–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2005.12.003
• Cameron K, Schnusenberg O (2009) Oil prices, SUVs, and Iraq: an investigation of automobile manufacturer oil price sensitivity. Energy Economics 31(3):375–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2008.12.003
• Cong RG, Wei YM, Jiao JL, Fan Y (2008) Relationships between oil price shocks and stock market: an empirical analysis from China. Energy Policy 36(9):3544–3553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.006
• El-Sharif I, Brown D, Burton B, Nixon B, Russell A (2005) Evidence on the nature and extent of the relationship between oil prices and equity values in the UK. Energy Economics 27(6):819–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2005.09.002
• Faff RW, Brailsford TJ (1999) Oil price risk and the Australian stock market. Journal of Energy Finance & Development 4(1):69–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1085-7443(99)00005-8
• Gu X, Firdousi SF, Obrenovic B, Afzal A, Amir B, Wu T (2023) The influence of green finance availability to retailers on purchase intention: A consumer perspective with the moderating role of consciousness. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-27355-w
• Hatemi-J A, Al Shayeb A, Roca E (2017) The effect of oil prices on stock prices: fresh evidence from asymmetric causality tests. Applied Economics 49(16):1584–1592. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.1221045
• Huang RD, Masulis RW, Stoll HR (1996) Energy shocks and financial markets. Journal of Futures Markets 16(1):1–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9934(199602)16:1<1::AID-FUT1>3.0.CO;2-Q
• Li Q, Cheng K, Yang X (2017) Response pattern of stock returns to international oil price shocks: from the perspective of China's oil industrial chain. Applied Energy 185:1821–1831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.12.060
• Managi S, Okimoto T (2013) Does the price of oil interact with clean energy prices in the stock market? Japan and the World Economy 27:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2013.03.003
• Miller JI, Ratti RA (2009) Crude oil and stock markets: stability, instability, and bubbles. Energy Economics 31(4):559–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2009.01.009
• Musa N, Izuchukwu OO, Saint Akadiri S (2024) Assessment of exchange rate determination in a mono-resource economy: A case of Nigeria. Journal of Economic Analysis 3(2):101–120. https://doi.org/10.58567/jea03020007
• Nandha M, Faff R (2008) Does oil move equity prices? A global view. Energy Economics 30(3):986–997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2007.09.003
• Narayan PK, Narayan S (2010) Modelling the impact of oil prices on Vietnam's stock prices. Applied Energy 87(1):356–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.05.037
• Ostic D, Wiredu I, Obrenovic B, Borgi H (2025) Sustainable leadership under environmental institutional pressures: How CEO green experience fuels eco-innovation and responsible production. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-025-07089-0
• Özkan AU (2023) The effects of oil price shocks on clean energy and oil and gas stock returns. Sosyoekonomi 31(56):217–240. https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2023.02.11
• Peace OE, Izuchukwu OO, Shehu AA (2016) Exchange rate fluctuation and tourism sector output in Nigeria. International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration 3(1):48–55. https://doi.org/10.18775/ijmsba.1849-5664-5419.2014.31.1006
• Ramos SB, Veiga H (2011) Risk factors in oil and gas industry returns: international evidence. Energy Economics 33(3):525–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2010.10.005
• Sadorsky P (2001) Risk factors in stock returns of Canadian oil and gas companies. Energy Economics 23(1):17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-9883(00)00072-4
• Silvapulle P, Smyth R, Zhang X, Fenech JP (2017) Nonparametric panel data model for crude oil and stock market prices in net oil importing countries. Energy Economics 67:255–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.08.017
• Woolridge JM (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
• Zhu HM, Li R, Li S (2014) Modelling dynamic dependence between crude oil prices and Asia-Pacific stock market returns. International Review of Economics & Finance 29:208–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2013.05.015
• Zhu H, Su X, You W, Ren Y (2017) Asymmetric effects of oil price shocks on stock returns: evidence from a two-stage Markov regime-switching approach. Applied Economics 49(25):2491–2507. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.1240351