Cross-border M&As in the financial sector: Is banking different from insurance?

This paper investigates what factors might help explain the internationalization strategy of banks and insurance companies, by comparing the determinants of cross-border M&As in the two sectors in a unified framework. The empirical analysis shows that between 1990 and 2003 the internationalization of banks and insurance companies followed similar patterns. Distance and economic and cultural integration are important determinants for both the banks’ and the insurance companies’ expansion abroad. Comparative advantage also has a prominent role, the more so for banks. The evidence is less supportive of the view that cross-border M&As are more frequent between similar countries, as predicted by the new trade theory. Finally, and most interestingly, we find indirect evidence consistent with the hypothesis that implicit barriers to foreign entry are more important in explaining the behavior of banks than that of insurance companies.     

Did the banking sector foresee the financial crisis? Evidence from risk factor disclosures

Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting - Beginning in December 2005, the SEC required registrants to discuss “the most significant factors that make the company risky” under the...     

Do CFOs matter? Evidence from the M&A process

This study examines the effect of Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) on mergers and acquisitions using a newly constructed CFO Influence Index. Because the perceived influence of CFOs is high in U.K. firms, we use that market for our analysis. We find that influential CFOs as measured by experience, stature, and pay are associated with more deal completions and the pursuit of smaller, domestic targets. High influence CFOs require less time to complete a deal and are able to identify higher quality targets for which they pay less. We also discover that firms with high influence CFOs enjoy greater long-term operating and financial performance post-merger. We conclude that influential CFOs are effective in creating shareholder value during M&A.     

How does banking sector globalization affect banking crisis?

A key feature of financial services liberalization is increasing banking-sector globalization.Using different measures to capture this phenomenon, the present study examines its impact on banking crisis for a dataset of 138 nations spanning the period 1998–2013, while controlling for other banking-industry specific, macroeconomic and external factors. Employing different econometric models and several robustness checks, I find greater banking sector globalization to reduce the occurrence of banking crisis. Moreover, greater bank asset concentration, diversification, credit flows, real interest rates, inflation rates, M2-to-foreign exchange reserves and nominal exchange rate depreciations significantly increase the likelihood of banking crisis, while higher bank profits, real GDP growth, economic development and economic freedom lower such chances. The results are further examined for nations across different levels of economic development and with different degrees of foreign bank penetration. The findings underscore that foreign bank presence provides greater financial stability in the banking industry of host nations.     

Does liberalization reduce agency costs? Evidence from the Indian banking sector

On February 16, 2002, the Reserve Bank of India issued a circular that signaled a policy liberalization facilitating acquisition of private sector banks in India by foreign entities. Portfolios of private sector and nationalized banks posted significant value gains in the days surrounding the announcement. The gains by private sector banks were almost double those of nationalized banks. We further analyze the firm specific abnormal returns using cross-sectional regressions and find a significant relation between firm-specific abnormal returns and factors typically associated with a bank’s potential for takeover. These results provide the first empirical support for Stulz’s hypothesis that one cause of the valuation gains associated with liberalization is the expected gain from a reduction of agency costs.     

Is the M&A announcement effect different across Europe? More evidences from continental Europe and the UK

The United Kingdom (UK) and Continental Europe are two of the most dynamic markets for mergers and acquisitions in the world. Using a sample of 2823 European acquisitions announced between 2002 and 2010, we investigate the effect of M&A announcements on stock returns of acquiring companies located in Continental Europe and the UK. The analysis is based on characteristics of takeover transactions such as method of payment, listing status of the target company, geographic scope (cross-border vs. domestic), industry relatedness of the bidding and the target company, amongst other factors. We find that European bidders earn positive abnormal returns both in cross-border and domestic acquisitions, and there is a significant difference between the abnormal returns of stock and cash deals, and between acquisitions of listed and unlisted target companies. However, the cross-border wealth effects are not significantly different between the UK and Continental Europe. We find that bidding firm’s shareholders gain more in equity than in cash offers if they are located in the UK and if they acquire unlisted targets. Cash bids for listed targets are associated with higher abnormal returns for bidders located in Continental Europe. We do not find supportive evidence that industry diversification destroys value for shareholders of both Continental European and the UK bidders.     

Is sovereign risk related to the banking sector?

We examine whether the banking sector within a nation is related to sovereign risk. We hypothesize that more competitive and sophisticated financial systems are less prone to panics or bank runs, and consequently will be associated with superior sovereign credit ratings. Using Ordered Probit with Aggregate Time Effects methodology, our results show that banking sector characteristics such as concentration in the banking system, liquidity of bank assets, and size of financial system are significantly related to sovereign credit ratings. Since the use of these sovereign ratings is ubiquitous in international finance in varied applications such as determination of the cost of international borrowing by governments, international cost of capital for FDI, and others, the relationships identified in this paper have important public policy implications.     

Is there a bright side to government banks? Evidence from the global financial crisis

Using a sample of banks from 56 countries, this paper investigates the lending behavior of government banks during the crisis of 2008, and its association with bank performance and the economy. Contrary to the traditional wisdom, we find that government banks can play a beneficial role under certain circumstances. Government banks have higher loan growth rates than private banks during the crisis. In countries with low corruption, the increased lending by government banks is associated with better bank performance and more favorable GDP and employment growth in the crisis period. In contrast, the results for countries with high corruption are more consistent with the political view: the increased lending by government banks is associated with underperformance relative to private banks, and creates no beneficial effects on either GDP growth or employment.     

Did the securitization market freeze affect bank lending during the financial crisis? Evidence from a credit register

Using data from the Italian Credit Register we identify the adverse effect of the freeze of the securitization market on bank lending during the crisis of 2007–2008. Applying a differences-in-differences estimation to data on firms that borrow from multiple banks, we single out credit supply by including firm fixed effects. Our results show that the degree to which banks tightened credit supply to nonfinancial firms is positively related to the share of loans they securitized before the crisis. The tightening translated into lower credit growth, higher interest rates, lower probability of accepting loan applications and higher probability of relationship termination. Firms were unable to fully compensate the negative credit supply shock, which suggests that the securitization freeze played a role in reducing aggregate credit availability.     

Liquidity creation through efficient M&As: A viable solution for vulnerable banking systems? Evidence from a stress test under a panel VAR methodology

According to the “cost efficiency - liquidity creation” hypothesis (CELCH), introduced in this paper, a rise in a bank’s cost efficiency level increases its liquidity creation. By employing a novel stress test scenario under a panel VAR methodology, the CELCH and the direction of causality between liquidity creation and cost efficiency are tested. Moreover, using new measures of liquidity creation (Berger and Bouwman, 2009), the question of whether potential bank mergers and acquisitions (M&As) can enhance liquidity creation and generate additional credit channels in the economy is addressed. The robustness of potential consolidation scenarios are evaluated and compared through the use of new “half-life” measures (Chortareas and Kapetanios, 2013). In line with CELCH, the positive impact of cost efficiency on liquidity creation is shown. The empirical evidence further suggests that potential consolidation activity can enhance the flow of credit in the economy. Bank shocks seem to have the most persistent effect on both liquidity creation and cost efficiency. Finally, doubts are cast on the strategies followed by policy authorities regarding the recent wave of M&As in the banking sector.     

Is small beautiful? The resilience of small banks during the European debt crisis

We examine the lending behaviour of small and large banks in the Eurozone during the sovereign debt crisis. Relative to large banks, small banks are less pro-cyclical in that they exhibit more stable lending growth across credit expansion and contraction periods. In peripheral countries, the portfolio rebalancing of small banks towards higher public debt (substitution effect) does not appear to cause a reduction of their lending to the private sector. Instead, the level of public debt seems to provide a liquidity buffer that influences bank-specific loan growth positively (complementarity effect), particularly during market-wide lending contractions. Our findings show that for small peripheral banks the substitution effect found in the literature can coexist with a complementarity effect when public debt grows faster than private loans. Our analysis contributes to the ongoing debate on the regulatory treatment of public debt in banks and supports incentives embedded in new banking regulation that penalise bank size.     

What do bank acquirers want? Evidence from worldwide bank M&A targets

What drives bankers to create larger and larger, often multinational banking groups? In this paper we investigate whether the targets in cross-border bank M&As are materially different from those banks targeted in domestic M&A deals. The main message of this paper is that, with few exceptions, domestic and foreign investors target similar banks. In particular, and contrary to what one might expect, bank size does not have a different effect on the probability of being a domestic or a cross-border target, instead it has a positive and highly significant effect in both cases. We find that the main differences between national and international M&As are the characteristics of the countries where the banks operate.     

Do banks appraise internal capital markets during credit shocks? Evidence from the Greek crisis

Using data of bank loans to Greek firms during the Greek crisis we provide evidence that affiliated firms, having access to the internal capital markets of their associated group, are less likely to default on their loans. Furthermore, banks require lower loan collateral coverage from affiliated firms and are less likely to downgrade the affiliates’ credit profile. Finally, banks are more likely to show forbearance to affiliated firms with non-performing loans. The results are consistent with the view that banks manage their relationships with firms in a business group jointly, as opposed to viewing each firm as an independent entity. Our findings also suggest that the value of risk sharing through internal capital markets increases when external financing is scarce.     

Can firms learn by observing? Evidence from cross-border M&As

In the presence of high uncertainty and limited experience, can observing the actions of other acquiring predecessors help firms make better acquisition decisions? Using a sample of cross-border M&As conducted by US acquirers in developing countries, we document a positive and significant relationship between an acquirer's performance and its predecessors' acquisition activity. This relationship is especially pronounced in the prevalence of news events about the outcome of predecessors' acquisitions, when predecessors consist of US peers from the same industry and/or when targets are based in culturally distant countries. Our findings shed light on one channel through which information spillovers across industries and acquiring firms could be a key driver of value creation in developing market cross-border M&As.     

Does ownership concentration improve M&A outcomes in emerging markets?: Evidence from India

Using firm level data from India, we examine the impact of ownership concentration on post-M&A performance of firms. Our analysis has implications for both the M&A literature, which emphasises the role of agency conflict between managers and owners of widely held companies as a key reason for M&A failures, and the corporate governance literature, especially in the context of emerging market economies. A cautious interpretation of our results suggests that while ownership concentration may reduce the manager–owner agency conflict, it may nevertheless precipitate other forms of agency conflict such that ownership concentration may not necessarily improve post-M&A performance. In particular, our results have implications for the literature on the agency conflict between large (or majority) shareholders and small (or minority) shareholders of a company, especially in contexts such as emerging market economies where corporate governance quality is weak.     

Does takeover activity affect stock price crash risk? Evidence from international M&A laws

We exploit the staggered initiation of merger and acquisition (M&A) laws across countries as a plausibly exogenous shock to the threat of takeover to examine whether the market for corporate control has a real effect on firm-level stock price crash risk. Using a difference-in-differences regression on a large sample of firms from 32 countries, we find that stock price crash risk significantly decreases following the passage of M&A laws. This effect is stronger for firms domiciled in countries with poorer investor protection and information environments and for firms with weaker firm-level governance. Further, financial reporting opacity and overinvestment significantly decrease in the post-M&A law periods. Our study suggests that an active takeover market has a disciplining effect on managerial bad news hoarding and leads to lower future crash risk.     

Is warrant really a derivative? Evidence from the Chinese warrant market

This paper studies the Chinese warrant market that has been developing since August 2005. Empirical evidence shows that the market prices of warrants are much higher systematically than the Black-Scholes prices with historical volatility. The prices of a warrant and its underlying asset do not support the monotonicity, perfect correlation and option redundancy properties. The cumulated delta-hedged gains for almost all expired warrants are negative. The negative gains are mainly driven by the volatility risk, and the trading values of the warrants for puts and the market risk for calls. The investors are trading some other risks in addition to the underlying risks.     

Where Is the Risk in Value? Evidence from a Market‐to‐Book Decomposition

We study the value premium using the multiples‐based market‐to‐book decomposition of Rhodes‐Kropf, Robinson, and Viswanathan (2005). The market‐to‐value component drives all of the value strategy return, while the value‐to‐book component exhibits no return predictability in either portfolio sorts or firm‐level regressions. Existing results linking market‐to‐book to operating leverage, duration, exposure to investment‐specific technology shocks, and analysts’ risk ratings derive from the unpriced value‐to‐book component. In contrast, results on expectation errors, limits to arbitrage, and certain types of cash flow risk and consumption risk exposure are due to the market‐to‐value component. Overall, our evidence casts doubt on several value premium theories.     

Returns and volatility spillover in the European banking industry during global financial crisis: Flight to perceived quality or contagion?

This paper empirically investigates return, volatility and leverage spillover effects between banking industrial stock markets of the major economies (ME) (Germany, UK and US) and the smaller stressed European Union countries (SE), (Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain and Portugal) from 2002 to 2014 which includes the global financial crisis period (2007–2014). Thus the paper investigates the influence of the global crisis on the spillover between the banking industrial stock markets of Europe and the US. We apply a multivariate GARCH–GJR framework to investigate the effects of the financial crisis with respect to spillover. Our results indicate an increase in both means and volatility spillover between the major economies and the stressed EU economies from the pre-crisis to the crisis period. During the pre-crisis period there is ample evidence of spillover from Germany, UK and the US to the smaller EU economies. Little evidence of a significant spillover from the smaller economies to the major economies is found during this period. We find that return and volatility transmission mechanisms between the major economies and the smaller EU countries are asymmetric during the crisis period. During the crisis, the level and amount of spillover from the major economies increase. But now there is also clear evidence of spillover from smaller EU economies to the major economies, this is especially true for Germany and the UK. Evidence of spillover effects suggests the existence of exploitable trading strategies and has important implications to investors in the areas of option pricing, portfolio optimization and risk management.