What drives investment bank performance? The role of risk,liquidity and fees prior to and during the crisis

This paper examines factors that affect the performance of investment banks in the G7 and Switzerland. In particular, we focus on the role of risk, liquidity and investment banking fees. Panel analysis shows that those variables significantly impact upon performance as derived from Stochastic Frontier Analysis (SFA). Given our sample also comprises the financial crisis, we further test for regime switches using dynamic panel threshold analysis. Results show different underlying regimes, in particular over the financial crisis. In addition, a strong positive effect of Z-Score on performance for banks in the regime of low default risk is reported, while fee-income ratio has also a positive impact for banks with low level of fees. On the other hand, liquidity exerts a negative impact. Notably, there is a clear trend of mobility of banks across the two identified threshold regimes with regard to risk a year before the financial crisis. Our results provide evidence that recent regulation reforms regarding capital adequacy and liquidity requirements are on the right track and could enhance performance.     

The impact of bank regulations, supervision, market structure, and bank characteristics on individual bank ratings: A cross-country analysis

We use country level data and bank level data from 71 countries and 857 banks to investigate the impact of bank regulations, supervision, market structure, and bank characteristics on individual bank ratings. The results indicate that less cost efficient banks, with higher than average levels of provisions relatively to their income, and lower liquidity tend to have lower ratings. Larger and more profitable banks tend to obtain higher ratings. Higher equity to assets ratio results in higher ratings only when we do not control for bank supervision and regulations. Capital requirements, restrictions on bank activities, official disciplinary power, explicit deposit insurance scheme, higher deposit insurer power, liquidity and diversification guidelines, entry requirements, fraction of entries denied, and economic freedom have a significant impact on ratings in all of our specifications. Disclosure requirements and foreign banks entry have a significant impact on ratings only when we simultaneously control for the regulatory environment and the market structure, while auditing requirements have a significant impact only when we control for the regulatory environment alone. Finally, banks in developed countries are assigned higher ratings. However, this impact disappears when we include the regulatory and supervision variables in the models.     

Liquidity and Expected Returns: Lessons from Emerging Markets

Given the cross-sectional and temporal variation in their liquidity,emerging equity markets provide an ideal setting to examinethe impact of liquidity on expected returns. Our main liquiditymeasure is a transformation of the proportion of zero dailyfirm returns, averaged over the month. We find that it significantlypredicts future returns, whereas alternative measures such asturnover do not. Consistent with liquidity being a priced factor,unexpected liquidity shocks are positively correlated with contemporaneousreturn shocks and negatively correlated with shocks to the dividendyield. We consider a simple asset-pricing model with liquidityand the market portfolio as risk factors and transaction coststhat are proportional to liquidity. The model differentiatesbetween integrated and segmented countries and time periods.Our results suggest that local market liquidity is an importantdriver of expected returns in emerging markets, and that theliberalization process has not fully eliminated its impact.     

Liquidity regulation and bank lending

Bank liquidity shortages during the global financial crisis of 2007–2009 led to the introduction of liquidity regulations, the impact of which has attracted the attention of academics and policymakers. In this paper, we investigate the impact of liquidity regulation on bank lending. As a setting, we use the Netherlands, where a Liquidity Balance Rule (LBR) was introduced in 2003. The LBR was imposed on Dutch banks only and did not apply to other banks operating elsewhere within the Eurozone. Using this differential regulatory treatment to overcome identification concerns and a difference-in-differences approach, we find that the LBR increased the volume of lending by Dutch banks relative to other banks located in the Eurozone. Increased equity, an inflow of retail deposits and subsequent increase in balance sheet size allowed Dutch banks to increase lending despite having to meet the LBR requirements. The LBR also affected the loan composition of Dutch banks (with corporate and retail lending increasing more than mortgage lending) and the maturity profile of loan portfolios. Our results have relevance for policymakers tasked with monitoring the impact of liquidity regulations on banks and the real economy.     

Liquidity, analysts, and institutional ownership

In this paper, we investigate the empirical relationship between institutional ownership, number of analysts following and stock market liquidity. We find that firms with larger number of financial analysts following have wider spreads, lower market quality index, and larger price impact of trades. However, we find that firms with higher institutional ownership have narrower spreads, higher market quality index, and smaller price impact of trades. In addition, we show that changes in our liquidity measures are significantly related to changes in institutional ownership over time. These results suggest that firms may alleviate information asymmetry and improve stock market liquidity by increasing institutional ownership. Our results are remarkably robust to different measures of liquidity and measures of information asymmetry.     

Bank Capital and Liquidity Creation: Granger-Causality Evidence

We examine the relation between capital and liquidity creation. This issue is interesting because of the potential impact on liquidity creation from tighter capital requirements such as those in Basel III. We perform Granger-causality tests in a dynamic GMM panel estimator framework on an exhaustive data set of Czech banks, which mainly includes small banks from 2000 to 2010. We observe a strong expansion in liquidity creation until the financial crisis that was mainly driven by large banks. We show that capital negatively Granger-causes liquidity creation in this industry, where majority of banks are small. But we also observe that liquidity creation Granger-causes a reduction in capital. These findings support the view that Basel III can reduce liquidity creation, but also that greater liquidity creation can reduce banks’ solvency. Thus, we show that this reverse causality generates a trade-off between the benefits of financial stability induced by stronger capital requirements and the benefits of increased liquidity creation.     

Liquidity and bank capital structure

Bank capital requirements reduce the probability of bank failure and help mitigate taxpayers’ sharing in the losses that result from bank failures. Under Basel III, direct capital requirements are supplemented with liquidity requirements. Our results suggest that liquidity provisions of banks are connected to bank capital and that changes in liquidity indirectly affect the capital structure of financial institutions. Liquidity appears to be another instrument for adjusting bank capital structure beyond just capital requirements. Consistent with Diamond and Rajan (2005), we find that liquidity and capital should be considered jointly for promoting financial stability.     

流动性覆盖率监管会影响货币政策传导效率吗？——来自中国银行业的证据

本文从流动性覆盖率监管要求出发,探讨了流动性监管与货币政策的协调机制问题。我们将流动性覆盖率监管要求纳入传统的Monti-Klein模型中,推导出流动性覆盖率监管对货币政策传导效率的影响及其作用机制。在此基础上,采用手工收集的我国65家商业银行2015—2019年半年度面板数据对理论假设进行实证检验。研究发现,流动性覆盖率监管要求会对货币政策传导效率产生影响,但这种影响取决于流动性监管约束下商业银行流动性管理行为的选择。商业银行主动调整融资结构、增强负债质量的行为在提高银行短期流动性水平的同时,也能显著提高货币政策传导效率,而流动性资产的囤积则可能降低货币政策传导效率。因此,应客观看待流动性覆盖率监管对货币政策传导效率的影响,引导商业银行的流动性管理行为,这将有助于实现流动性监管与货币政策有效传导的“双赢”目标。     

Information,sell-side research,and market making

The interaction between an investment bank's research and market making arms may have important implications for the trading of a firm's stock. We investigate the impact that research has on the liquidity provided by the bank's market maker. Utilizing a large sample of Nasdaq firms, we show that market makers whose banks also provide research coverage provide more liquidity and contribute more to price discovery than do market makers without such research coverage. Finally, we show that such “affiliated” market makers are less affected by uncertainty following earnings announcements. Our results provide new evidence on the sources of liquidity improvements for Nasdaq firms, and suggest that the information produced by banks in the sell-side research process is beneficial to their market makers.     

Liquidity shocks,size and the relative performance of hedge fund strategies

We examine whether the increase in the flow of capital to hedge funds over the period 1994–2005 had a negative impact on performance. More specifically, we study the relative performance of small versus large funds for each of the hedge fund strategies. Our results indicate that on an absolute return basis, small funds outperform large funds. On a risk-adjusted return basis, however, we find that large funds outperform small funds, and that large funds are also shown to hold less liquid assets and take on less systematic and idiosyncratic risk than small funds. Further, funds that experience positive liquidity shocks generally outperform those that experience negative liquidity shocks. We also find evidence that hedge fund managers that are aggressive in dealing with liquidity shocks perform better than hedge fund managers that are conservative in dealing with liquidity shocks.     

Liquidity in the Foreign Exchange Market: Measurement,Commonality, and Risk Premiums

We provide the first systematic study of liquidity in the foreign exchange market. We find significant variation in liquidity across exchange rates, substantial illiquidity costs, and strong commonality in liquidity across currencies and with equity and bond markets. Analyzing the impact of liquidity risk on carry trades, we show that funding (investment) currencies offer insurance against (exposure to) liquidity risk. A liquidity risk factor has a strong impact on carry trade returns from 2007 to 2009, suggesting that liquidity risk is priced. We present evidence that liquidity spirals may trigger these findings.     

Nonlinear market liquidity: An empirical examination

We offer novel indicators of market-wide liquidity. Previous literature uses averages of individual liquidity indicators to track the evolution of market-wide liquidity. Instead, we focus on the tails of the market liquidity distribution. First, we construct aggregate liquidity indicators using low and high quantiles of six liquidity measures (total volume, number of trades, effective spread, realized spread, price impact and lambda). Our results show that market conditions have an asymmetric impact on the tails of the liquidity distribution. In the second part of the study, we test for nonlinearity of the effects of market determinants on market liquidity.     

Liquidity effects on price and return co-movements in commodity futures markets

Commodity price comovement is an important research area in finance, and previous studies have investigated the determinants of price comovement using low-frequency (monthly or quarterly) macroeconomic data. In comparison, our paper attempts to scrutinize the liquidity effect on commodity prices and return movements based on daily data. Our findings contribute to the literature in three ways. First, we find significant positively correlated price movements across different commodity markets on a daily basis, and such comovement is driven by the cross-sectional liquidity spillover effect. Second, we observe that a cointegration relationship between individual commodity prices and the global price index can be established only if the liquidity effect is controlled. Finally, instantaneous daily liquidity shocks (i.e., innovation) exert a negative impact on daily commodity returns. However, liquidity shocks do not have a significant impact on monthly returns. Our findings are robust and have significant implications for macroeconomic policymaking, such as managing inflation risk.     

Uncertainty,market structure,and liquidity

In this study we show that market uncertainty [measured by the Chicago Board Options Exchange Market Volatility Index (VIX)] exerts a large market-wide impact on liquidity, which gives rise to co-movements in individual asset liquidity. The effect of VIX on stock liquidity is greater than the combined effects of all other common determinants of stock liquidity. We show that the uncertainty elasticity of liquidity (UEL: percent change in liquidity given a 1% change in VIX) has increased around regulatory changes in the US markets that increased the role of public traders in liquidity provision, reduced the minimum allowable price variation, weakened the affirmative obligation of NASDAQ dealers, and abolished the specialist system on the NYSE.     

Market liquidity and institutional trading during the 2007–8 financial crisis

This paper shows that institutional sell-side herding increased bid–ask spreads and liquidity risk during the 2007–8 financial crisis. Such an impact on liquidity is most pronounced in firms with large numbers of institutions that sold the same stocks, that is, have correlated trades. For the same reason, we find institutional investors with a dedicated, buy-and-hold, investment style to be the least likely to herd; their trading activity did not affect stock market liquidity during the crisis. Our results are robust to alternative explanations, different test specifications and consistent with recent theories highlighting the negative impact of institutional trading activity on market liquidity during a crisis.     

Foreign Institutional Investment,Ownership, and Liquidity: Real and Informational Frictions

The literature widely documents the negative liquidity impact of foreign participation in firms that permit high foreign institutional ownership. This paper employs a unique setting for the limited participation of qualified foreign institutional investors (QFIIs) in China's A-share market and examines how this impacts on stock liquidity in emerging markets. Contrary to the findings in the literature, foreign investor participation helps enhance the liquidity of affected stocks by promoting trade activities and price discovery. The improvement in liquidity does not occur through the information friction channel, but rather the real friction channel. Our results are robust to endogeneity issue and the possible influence of the global financial crisis, industry effects and the stock exchange. Further, the liquidity improving effects of QFII are even stronger when the analysis is performed on a subsample of QFII firms.     

Convertible bond arbitrage,liquidity externalities,and stock prices

In the context of convertible bond issuance, we examine the impact of arbitrage activity on underlying equity markets. In particular, we use changes in equity short interest following convertible bond issuance to identify convertible bond arbitrage activity and analyze its impact on stock market liquidity and prices for the period 1993 to 2006. There is considerable evidence of arbitrage-induced short selling resulting from issuance. Moreover, we find strong evidence that this activity is systematically related to liquidity improvements in the stock. These results are robust to controlling for the potential endogeneity of arbitrage activity.     

Foreign institutional ownership and stock market liquidity: Evidence from Indonesia

From January 2002 to August 2007, foreign institutions held almost 70% of the free-float value of the Indonesian equity market, or 41% of the total market capitalization. Over the same period, liquidity on the Jakarta Stock Exchange improved substantially with the average bid–ask spread more than halved and the average depth more than doubled. In this study we examine the Granger causality between foreign institutional ownership and liquidity, while controlling for persistence in foreign ownership and liquidity measures. We find that foreign holdings have a negative impact on future liquidity: a 10% increase in foreign institutional ownership in the current month is associated with approximately 2% increase in the bid–ask spread, 3% decrease in depth, and 4% rise in price sensitivity in the next month, challenging the view that foreign institutions enhance liquidity in small emerging markets. Our findings are consistent with the negative liquidity impact of institutional investor ownership in developed markets.     

Dynamic effects of idiosyncratic volatility and liquidity on corporate bond spreads

We study the dynamic impact of idiosyncratic volatility and bond liquidity on corporate bond spreads over time and empirically disentangle both effects. Using an extensive data set, we find that both idiosyncratic volatility and liquidity are critical mainly for the distress portfolios, i.e., low-rated and short-term bonds; for others only volatility matters. The effects of volatility and liquidity shocks on bond spreads were both exacerbated during the recent financial crisis. Liquidity shocks are quickly absorbed into bonds prices; however, volatility shocks are more persistent and have a long-term effect. Our results overall suggest significant differences between how volatility and liquidity dynamically impact bond spreads.     

Actual share repurchases,timing and liquidity

Research on the impact of open market share repurchases has been hindered by the lack of data available on actual share repurchases in many countries, including the US. Using a previously unused database containing detailed information on 36,848 repurchases made by 352 French firms, we show that corporate share repurchases have a significant adverse effect on liquidity as measured by bid–ask spread or depth. Our results also indicate that share repurchases largely reflect contrarian trading rather than managerial timing ability.