影子银行会加剧银行破产风险吗?——基于我国上市银行的实证分析

本文基于我国16家上市银行2006—2014年的数据,通过采用随机效应面板模型,得出影子银行和商业银行破产风险之间存在阈值效应,当影子银行规模超过33.7万亿元时,影子银行将会增加商业银行的破产风险。将破产风险细分为资产组合风险和杠杆风险,发现影子银行和银行资产组合风险之间同样存在阈值效应,而与杠杆风险之间存在正向关系。     

中国上市银行特许权价值的自律效应

银行特许权价值是银行风险自我约束的重要机制。本文使用托宾Q值衡量了中国14家上市银行的特许权价值,借助面板数据回归分析对银行特许权价值的自律效应进行了实证检验。结果表明:上市银行特许权价值对反映外部评价的市场风险确实存在着自律效应,但还未对表现为内部风险控制的资本充足率产生显著作用。因国家对银行业提供了全面担保,银行所有制性质对银行风险无显著影响。随着银行业竞争日趋激烈,通过引导商业银行提升特许权价值来激励银行审慎经营并加强内部风险控制,对后金融危机时期中国银行业的健康稳定发展具有积极意义。     

特许权价值、隐性保险与风险承担——中国银行业的经验分析

本文以特许权价值与风险承担为主要研究视角,运用面板数据模型,分析隐性存款保险制度下我国特许权价值经济效应的有效性。研究结果表明,隐性保险降低了特许权价值对银行风险承担行为的敏感性,特许权价值的自律机制不仅对国有银行几乎失效,而且对非国有银行的风险约束效应也不显著。如此说明当前中国商业银行受到隐性存款保险制度的全面保护,从而弱化了开展全面风险管理的激励机制。     

商业银行特许权价值的自律效应研究

特许权价值是商业银行具有的从受保护市场获取未来租金的牌照价值,通常情况下,具有相对较高特许权价值的银行为了避免破产,更有动力倾向于采取谨慎策略,因而其发挥着银行风险自律器的作用。通过银行风险行为的静态选择和动态选择视角,考证特许权价值的自律效应,对于后过渡时期的银行监管政策具有启发意义。     

外资银行进入对我国商业银行特许权价值的影响

本文通过托宾Q法度量了我国上市银行的特许权价值,并利用计量模型检验了外资银行进入的资产份额和数量份额与上市银行特许权价值之间的关系。实证结果表明,外资银行进入的数量份额与上市银行特许权价值显著负相关,而资产份额与特许权价值却是显著正相关,且对特许权价值影响更大,特许权价值的提高可以促使银行冒险动机减弱,降低银行的风险。     

政府监管对单体银行稳健性的影响有多大——来自中国上市商业银行的经验证据

本文以2000²012年16家上市银行为样本,实证分析了特许权价值、资本监管、隐性保险对银行稳健性的影响。研究结果表明:特许权价值、资本监管和隐性保险能够降低银行风险,提高银行安全性;特许权价值、隐性保险可以部分提高绩效,而资本监管对绩效的影响不显著;特许权价值、资本监管不能显著改善银行流动性,政府的隐性保险却可以提高银行流动性;资本杠杆和经营杠杆对银行稳健性的影响很小;次贷危机对银行风险影响较大,却没有显著影响银行盈利性和流动性。     

特许权价值、市场结构与银行风险承担

银行业的风险程度关系到整个经济体的稳定与发展,控制风险是银行经营的重要目标之一。目前对银行风险承担的研究主要从特许权价值和市场竞争的角度分别展开分析。本文以156家中国商业银行为研究对象,同时分析了银行特许权价值、市场竞争程度对银行风险的影响。通过实证分析,我们发现目前影响我国商业银行特许权价值的因素主要来自银行因素而非市场因素;在没有控制内生性的前提下,发现银行特许权价值有效地约束了银行风险,而市场竞争的加剧增加了银行风险行为;在控制银行风险和特许权价值内生性后,发现特许权价值对中国商业银行风险的约束效应基本不存在。因此,要维持银行业的稳定,需要规范银行的竞争行为,提高特许权价值的风险约束效应。     

中国城市商业银行收入结构多元化与银行风险

本文采用40家中国城市商业银行2007~2013年间的微观数据,将两步系统广义矩估计方法引入到非平衡面板数据模型中,实证检验了银行收入结构多元化对银行风险的影响。研究结果表明:非利息收入占营业收入的相对比重会显著增加银行的资产组合风险,收入结构多元化指数会显著分散银行的资产组合风险;非利息收入占营业收入的相对比重会显著降低银行的杠杆风险,收入结构多元化指数会显著增加银行的杠杆风险;银行收入结构多元化对银行整体风险没有显著的影响,原因可能是来自于收入结构多元化对银行整体风险分解指标的正负效应的相互抵消。     

商业银行特许权价值风险约束效应研究

从银行特许权价值的定义入手,利用样本银行1998～2007年的年度数据,阐述和分析了银行特许权价值的风险约束效应。研究结果表明,银行特许权价值对银行的风险行为有很强的约束效应,即拥有较高特许权价值的银行不会倾向于采取过度冒险的经营行为,而那些特许权价值较低的银行会增加冒险经营的动机。     

银行特许权价值的内生风险约束效应——基于中国上市银行的实证研究

本文采用托宾Q值来衡量上市银行的特许权价值,基于分阶段动态回归模型,对银行特许权价值的影响因素及其风险约束效应进行研究。实证结果显示,外生性和内生性的银行特许权价值都有显著的风险约束效应;回归结果可以通过稳健性检验。     

Bank Capital Standards for Market Risk: A Welfare Analysis

We propose a simple model that is suitable for evaluating alternative bank capital regulatory proposals for market risk. Our model formalizes the conflict between bank objectives and regulatory goals. Banks' decisions represent a tension between their desire to exploit the deposit-insurance put option and their desire to preserve franchise value. Regulators seek to balance the social value of deposits in mediating transactions against the deadweight costs of failure resolution. Our social welfare criterion is standard: a weighted average agents' utilities.We demonstrate that banks do not incrementally alter their portfolio risk as the economic environment changes. Rather, banks either choose the minimal feasible risk or the maximal feasible risk. This pattern, in turn, drives regulatory decisions: The first goal of the regulator is to induce banks to choose the minimal risk level. For all nontrivial cases, unregulated banks fail to choose the first-best allocations. Traditional ex-ante capital requirements can induce banks to choose the socially-optimal level of portfolio risk, but the required capital is often inefficiently high. In contrast, variants of the Federal Reserve Board's precommitment proposal imply far smaller efficiency losses, and achieve allocations at or near the first-best for most reasonable model specifications. The ex-post penalties required for the optimal implementation of precommitment are not excessively large. The welfare gains from precommitment are even higher when the precommitment penalty function is precluded from sending banks into default. We conclude that state-contingent regulatory mechanisms, of which the precommitment approach is an example, offer the possibility of substantial gains in regulatory efficiency, relative to traditional state non-contingent regulation.     

Does Diversification Improve the Performance of German Banks? Evidence from Individual Bank Loan Portfolios

Should banks be diversified or focused? Does diversification indeed lead to increased performance and therefore greater safety on the part of banks as traditional portfolio and banking theory would suggest? Recently, Acharya et al. (J Bus, 79:1355–1412, 2006) have found that for Italian banks the answers to these questions depend on the level of risk that a bank has taken. In this paper we investigate whether this result is robust to the choice of the sample and to the calculation of the risk variable. To this end we use a unique data set of the individual bank loan portfolios of 983 German banks for the period from 1996 to 2002 and calculate a Value-at-Risk based risk variable. We then investigate the link between banks’ profitability and their portfolio diversification across different industries, broader economic sectors and geographical regions. We find little evidence of large performance benefits associated with diversification: For the majority of our data, diversification tends to be associated with reductions in bank returns, even after controlling for risk. Only in a few cases (e.g., high-risk banks and industrial diversification) do we find statistically significant positive relationships between diversification and bank returns. Our findings contradict both the empirical findings of Acharya et al. (J Bus, 79:1355–1412, 2006) and the theoretical findings of Winton (Don’t put all your eggs in one basket? Diversification and specialization in lending. Working Paper No. 00-16, University of Minnesota, 1999).     

Does the stock market value bank diversification?

This paper investigates whether or not functionally diversified banks have a comparative advantage in terms of long-term performance/risk profile compared to their specialized competitors. To that end, this study uses market-based measures of return potential and bank risk. We calculate the franchise value over time of European banks as a measure of their long-run performance potential. In addition, we measure risk as both the systematic and the idiosyncratic risk components derived from a bank stock return model. Finally, we analyze the return/risk trade-off implied in different functional diversification strategies using a panel data analysis over the period 1989–2004. A higher share of non-interest income in total income affects banks’ franchise values positively. Diversification of revenue streams from distinct financial activities increases the systematic risk of banks while the effect on the idiosyncratic risk component is non-linear and predominantly downward-sloping. These findings have conflicting implications for different stakeholders, such as investors, bank shareholders, bank managers and bank supervisors.     

银行监管和股东属性对银行风险的影响——基于新兴经济体的监管数据分析

银行监管按世界银行的标准划分为总体监管和12类分项监管;银行大股东属性包括政府类、金融企业类、外资类等.总体监管可以有效地降低银行风险;大股东为工业类、金融类企业的银行能够更好地控制风险,而家族类银行的风险程度较高;通过对分项监管进行研究可以发现,加强对所有权、资本要求、经营活动限制、外部审计要求、流动性、存款保险制度、退出及监管效率八个方面的监管可降低银行总体风险,而加强准入、内部管理、资产分类配置、信息披露这四类监管反而会增加银行总体风险.     

Bank Competition and Financial Stability

Under the traditional “competition-fragility” view, more bank competition erodes market power, decreases profit margins, and results in reduced franchise value that encourages bank risk taking. Under the alternative “competition-stability” view, more market power in the loan market may result in higher bank risk as the higher interest rates charged to loan customers make it harder to repay loans, and exacerbate moral hazard and adverse selection problems. The two strands of the literature need not necessarily yield opposing predictions regarding the effects of competition and market power on stability in banking. Even if market power in the loan market results in riskier loan portfolios, the overall risks of banks need not increase if banks protect their franchise values by increasing their equity capital or engaging in other risk-mitigating techniques. We test these theories by regressing measures of loan risk, bank risk, and bank equity capital on several measures of market power, as well as indicators of the business environment, using data for 8,235 banks in 23 developed nations. Our results suggest that—consistent with the traditional “competition-fragility” view—banks with a higher degree of market power also have less overall risk exposure. The data also provides some support for one element of the “competition-stability” view—that market power increases loan portfolio risk. We show that this risk may be offset in part by higher equity capital ratios.

Bank Capital Requirements, Capital Structure and Regulation

This paper studies the impact of capital requirements, deposit insurance and franchise value on a bank’s capital structure. We find that properly regulated banks voluntarily choose to maintain capital in excess of the minimum required. Central to this decision is both firm franchise value and the ability of regulators to place banks in receivership stripping equity holders of firm value. These features of our model help explain both the capital structure of the large mortgage Government Sponsored Enterprises and the recent increase in risk taking through leverage by financial institutions. The insights gained from the model are useful in guiding the discussion of financial regulatory reforms.     

Bank Capital Standards for Market Risk: A Welfare Analysis

We propose a simple model that is suitable for evaluating alternativebank capital regulatory proposals for market risk. Our modelformalizes the conflict between bank objectives and regulatorygoals. Banks' decisions represent a tension between their desireto exploit the deposit-insurance put option and their desireto preserve franchise value. Regulators seek to balance thesocial value of deposits in mediating transactions against thedeadweight costs of failure resolution. Our social welfare criterionis standard: a weighted average agents' utilities. We demonstrate that banks do not incrementally alter their portfoliorisk as the economic environment changes. Rather, banks eitherchoose the minimal feasible risk or the maximal feasible risk.This pattern, in turn, drives regulatory decisions: The firstgoal of the regulator is to induce banks to choose the minimalrisk level. For all nontrivial cases, unregulated banks failto choose the first-best allocations. Traditional ex-ante capitalrequirements can induce banks to choose the socially-optimallevel of portfolio risk, but the required capital is often inefficientlyhigh. In contrast, variants of the Federal Reserve Board's precommitmentproposal imply far smaller efficiency losses, and achieve allocationsat or nearthe first-best for most reasonable model specifications.The ex-post penalties required for the optimal implementationof precommitment are not excessively large. The welfare gainsfrom precommitment are even higher when the precommitment penaltyfunction is precluded from sending banks into default. We concludethat state-contingent regulatory mechanisms, of which the precommitmentapproach is an example, offer the possibility of substantialgains in regulatory efficiency, relative to traditional statenon-contingent regulation.