贷款证券化、监管资本套利与资本监管改进

巴塞尔协议的资本充足率指标可以反映银行部门吸收风险损失的能力,但是无法监测和控制银行体系外的贷款总额和累积的信用风险。20世纪70年代的贷款证券化创新导致银行进行监管资本套利,并使得资本充足率监管趋于失效。本文基于贷款证券化下银行贷款余额与社会贷款余额的差异,分析银行监管资本套利的微观机制并提出改进资本监管的建议。     

The role of securitization in bank liquidity and funding management

This paper studies the role of securitization in bank management. I propose a new index of “bank loan portfolio liquidity” which can be thought of as a weighted average of the potential to securitize loans of a given type, where the weights reflect the composition of a bank loan portfolio. I use this new index to show that by allowing banks to convert illiquid loans into liquid funds, securitization reduces banks' holdings of liquid securities and increases their lending ability. Furthermore, securitization provides banks with an additional source of funding and makes bank lending less sensitive to cost of funds shocks. By extension, the securitization weakens the ability of the monetary authority to affect banks' lending activity but makes banks more susceptible to liquidity and funding crisis when the securitization market is shut down.     

资产证券化对商业银行盈利的影响——异质性视角下的研究

本文以中国银行业为研究样本,考察资产证券化对银行盈利的影响.研究发现:资产证券化显著促进银行盈利增长,并且该效应对于非上市银行与规模较小银行更为显著;对于资产流动性结构更为合理、风险承担水平更低、资本充足状况及经营绩效更好的中小银行而言,资产证券化对盈利能力的正向效应更强;同时基于时间变化趋势的检验显示,在发行首笔资产...     

Credit Card Securitization and Regulatory Arbitrage

This paper explores the motivations and desirability of off-balance sheet financing of credit card receivables by banks. We explore three related issues: the degree to which securitizations result in the transfer of risk out of the originating bank, the extent to which securitization permits banks to economize on capital by avoiding regulatory minimum capital requirements, and whether banks' avoidance of minimum capital regulation through securitization with implicit recourse has been undesirable from a regulatory standpoint. We show that regulatory capital arbitrage is an important consequence of securitization. The avoidance of capital requirements could be motivated either by efficient contracting or by safety net abuse. We find that securitizing banks set their capital relative to managed assets according to market perceptions of their risk, and seem not to be motivated by maximizing implicit subsidies relating to the government safety net when managing their risk. This evidence is more consistent with the efficient contracting view of securitization with implicit recourse than with the safety net abuse view.     

Value-at-risk vs. building block regulation in banking

Existing regulatory capital requirements are often criticized for only being loosely linked to the economic risk of the banks' assets. In view of the attempts of international regulators to introduce more risk sensitive capital requirements, we theoretically examine the effect of specific regulatory capital requirements on the risk-taking behavior of banks. More precisely, we develop a continuous time framework where the banks' choice of asset risk is endogenously determined. We compare regulation based on the Basel I building block approach to value-at-risk or ‘internal model’-based capital requirements with respect to risk taking behavior, deposit insurance liability, and shareholder value. The main findings are: (i) value-at-risk-based capital regulation creates a stronger incentive to reduce asset risk when banks are solvent, (ii) solvent banks that reduce their asset risk reduce the current value of the deposit insurance liability significantly, (iii) under value-at-risk regulation the risk reduction behavior of banks is less sensitive to changes in their investment opportunity set, and (iv) banks' equityholders can benefit from risk-based capital requirements.     

混合型资本工具与商业银行资本结构优化

资本管理是银行风险管理的核心内容,银行通过资本结构的合理安排,不仅能有效覆盖风险,满足资本监管要求,还能同时提高财务效率。本文结合混合型资本工具的特点及各国监管规定,分析了商业银行的最佳资本结构选择,并提出了我国商业银行的应对策略。     

The Basel Committee proposals for a new capital accord: implications for Italian banks

Following a few general considerations on the recently proposed revision of the Basel Agreement on capital adequacy, this paper focuses on the first pillar of the Basel Committee proposals, the handling of capital requirements for credit risk in the banking book. The Basel Committee envisages an approach alternatively based on external ratings or on internal rating systems for the determination of the minimum capital requirement related to bank loan portfolios. This approach supports a system of capital requirements that is more sensitive to credit risk. On the basis of specific assumptions, these requirements provide a measure of the value at risk (VaR) produced by models used by major international banks. We first address the impact of the standardised and (internal ratings-based) IRB foundation approach using general data on Italian banks loans' portfolios default rates. We then simulate the impact of the proposed new rules on the corporate loan portfolios of Italian banks, using the unique data set of mortality rates recently published by the Bank of Italy. Three main conclusions emerge from the analysis: (i) the standardised approach implicitly penalizes Italian banks in their interbank funding as their rating is generally below AA/Aa, (ii) the average default rate experienced by Italian banks is higher than the one implied in the benchmark risk weight (BRW) proposed by the Basel Committee for the IRB foundation approach, thereby potentially leading to an increase in the regulatory risk weights, and (iii) the risk-weight is based on an average asset correlation that is significantly higher than the one historically recorded within the Italian banks' corporate borrowers. These findings support the need for a significant revision of the basic inputs and assumptions of the Basel proposals. Finally, in relation to the conditions that allow the capital market to effectively discipline banks, we comment on the proposals advanced in relation to the third pillar of the new capital adequacy scheme.     

我国商业银行资本管理新趋势对金融市场发展的影响

为吸取美国次贷金融危机的教训,一系列资本监管改革制度于2010年取得国际共识并逐步付诸实施。我国商业银行资本管理将呈现新的趋势,并影响到金融市场的发展：股票融资吸引力将上升,债券融资将有所萎缩,贷款转让、资产证券化市场将迎来新的发展机遇,信用债市场结构将面临调整。     

Securitization and the balance sheet channel of monetary transmission

This paper shows that the balance sheet channel of monetary transmission is stronger for US banks that securitize their assets. This finding is different, in spirit, from the widely-found negative relationship between financial development and the strength of the lending channel of monetary transmission. Focusing on the balance sheet channel, and using bank-level observations, we find that securitizing banks are more sensitive to borrowers’ balance sheets and that monetary policy has a greater impact on this sensitivity for securitizing banks. The optimality conditions from a simple partial equilibrium framework suggest that the positive effects of securitization on policy effectiveness could be due to the high sensitivity of security prices to policy rates.     

The impact of securitization on credit rationing: Empirical evidence

We study whether banks’ involvement into different types of securitization activity – asset backed securities (ABS) and covered bonds – in Spain influences credit supply before and during the financial crisis. While both ABS and covered bonds were hit by the crisis, the former were hit more severely. Employing a disequilibrium model to identify credit rationing, we find that firms with banks that were more involved in securitization see their credit constraints more relaxed in normal periods. In contrast, only greater covered bonds issuance reduces credit rationing during crisis periods whereas ABS aggravates these firms’ credit rationing in crisis periods. Our results are in line with the theoretical predictions that a securitization instrument that retains risk (covered bond) may induce a more prudent risk behavior of banks than an instrument that provides risk transferring (ABS).     

Financing Shipping Companies and Shipping Operations: A Risk‐Management Perspective

Shipping has always been a volatile and cyclical business. The extreme changes in revenues, operating cash flows, and asset values during the recent financial crises have upset the usual means of financing shipping companies. While bank debt will remain important in the future, the new regulatory environment has been forcing shipping banks to shift these risks from their balance sheets to capital markets through instruments such as loan securitization. As a result, the shipping industry will increasingly look to capital markets for external funds. And shipping banks are likely to change from being commercial bank lending institutions to becoming more like investment banks that arrange a variety of financing solutions, including high yield bonds or public equity. Risk management will be central to shipping companies in this new environment. Shipping companies can manage their own risks by modifying operations, employing freight and vessel price derivatives, or adjusting their capital structures. To arrive at the value‐maximizing combination of these three basic methods, they must decide which risks to bear, which to manage internally, and which to transfer to the capital markets. These decisions require shipping financial managers to assess the effect of each risk on firm value, understand how each contributes to total risk, and determine the most cost‐effective way to limit that risk to an acceptable level.     

Does the ownership structure matter for banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior? Empirical evidence from a developing country

This paper applies the two-stage least squares (2SLS) estimator to examine the bi-directional relationship between banks’ capital regulation and risk-taking behavior concerning the impact of ownership structure. We have used a balanced panel dataset of banks from a developing country over the most recent period between 2006 and 2014. The empirical findings of this study suggest that higher capital regulation enhances banks’ stability when it combats with credit risk but higher credit risk often persuades abating capital ratio. Particularly, the key results are as follows: (i) the higher association of minority active shareholding in stability issues is positive; (ii) the higher contribution of active share holding promotes banks’ capital ratio; (iii) the lower ownership concentration prevents credit risk; (iv) private commercial banks are more risk averse and stable than state-owned banks and other type of banks; and (v) notably, Islamic banks show their superiority through overall performance despite their lower capital stability than conventional banks. Besides, no models show significant non-linear relationship between capital regulation and risk-taking except models of stability show a U-shaped relation in capital equation, indicating that when regulatory pressure works in a country then bank lose solvency at the initial stage. Finally, it also provides some imperative policy implications which will be very useful for a wide range of stakeholders.     

Securitization: The Transformation of Illiquid Financial Assets into Liquid Capital Market Securities Examples from the European Market

Since the benefits a firm can derive from securitization are universal, the discussion of a market bounded by national borders is somewhat artificial unless the focus is on constraints particular to the country which promote or inhibit the use of securitization. With the exception of the United Kingdom, regulatory constraints have been an important factor in slowing the development of a European market for asset and mortgage backed securities. In addition to the regulatory hurdles, securitization in Europe has been inhibited by segmented corporate bond markets and the relatively slow development of money market savings vehicles for households. Liquidity across credit spectrums has been enhanced since the introduction of the Euro, as has been the competition for savings. European companies are developing the ability to securitize even if the technique is not yet being widely exploited. What is the European market for mortgage and asset backed securities? Does it include the U.S. credit card banks, Citicorp, Chase, MBNA, and First USA that have refinanced U.S. credit card receivables in European currencies and in Euro? Does it include GMAC which has structured Swiss Franc and Euro ABS backed by its U.S. dealer floor plan loans? Does it include Japanese banks that have refinanced Yen denominated leases with Euro and Swiss Franc ABS? Does it include Barclays' issue of $1 billion of ABS backed by sterling credit card receivables? Of course the answer is yes. Markets are defined by both the supply and demand sides. Our analysis focuses on the supply side of the domestic European market.     

Securitization and Bank Performance

Using predominantly precrisis U.S. commercial bank data, this paper employs a propensity score matching approach to analyze whether individual banks did improve their performance through securitization. On average, our results show that securitizing banks tend to be more profitable institutions, with higher credit risk exposure. Despite a more diversified funding structure, they face higher funding costs. We also find that securitizing banks tend to hold larger and less diversified loan portfolios, have less liquidity, and hold less capital. However, our analysis does not provide evidence to suggest that securitization had an impact upon bank performance.     

Capital structure of Islamic banks: How different are they from conventional banks?

This paper uses comprehensive data for 112 Islamic and 709 conventional banks from 23 countries over 1995–2015 to compare the capital structure of Islamic banks (IBs) and conventional banks (CBs) from several perspectives. We find that IBs and CBs seem to face different cost pressures in the process of adjusting towards the target capital structure. Asset growth is a key driver of capital structure change, and CBs adjust leverage more aggressively in response to changes in total assets compared to IBs, because they have an advantage in obtaining external funds and can achieve leverage adjustments faster and at a low cost. IBs have more regulatory capital, but their ability to respond to risks is weaker than traditional banks. The results of this paper suggest that Islamic banks are in a disadvantaged position compared to CBs in capital structure management. The conclusion suggests that IBs need to expand its financing tools and funding sources to reduce adjustment costs and improve their capability to deal with asset risk.     

资产证券化的风险及其防范与化解

资产证券化业务是国际资本市场发展最快、最具活力的一种金融产品,它以其独特的筹资方式而具有高效的融资功能,同时也存在巨大的市场风险。随着我国资本市场的不断成熟,我国也开始试点,由于在经济环境、法律框架等方面的限制,我国实施资产证券化业务还面临许多障碍,为此我们必须加强对其风险的防范并采取有效的措施化解风险,不断完善我国资产证券化的模式和相关政策,使风险降到最小。     

Assessing Systemic Risk Exposure from Banks and GSEs Under Alternative Approaches to Capital Regulation

A key function of capital regulation is to mitigate the potential for systemic financial risk by maintaining public confidence in the ability of regulated market participants to honor their financial obligations in times of market stress. While it is well known that the portfolios of banks and non-banks, especially those intermediaries specializing in mortgage securitization or in specialized mortgage lending, differ in important respects, debate over alternative capital regulations has yet to recognize the implications of these differences, despite the increasing importance of non-bank intermediaries in risk-sharing markets. This paper uses a simple two-date discrete state space exchange economy with opportunities for moral hazard on the part of financial intermediaries to investigate the design of capital regulations to control systemic risk. Holding constant asset risks, we show that intermediaries that issue contingent liabilities may exhibit low or no risk of insolvency while holding significantly less capital than deposit-taking institutions because banks primarily issue claims that promise fixed payments in all states of nature. We also show that, rather than raising capital requirements, the control of systemic risk may involve lowering capital requirements and extending guarantees to liability-holders, without a necessary increase in expected subsidy payments, if such requirements account for shareholder incentives. Specifically, we analyze an example of regulatory policy in which lower capital requirements and an ex post penalty schedule reduce systemic risk by increasing the volume of tradable securities exchanged and by offering a credible mechanism by which intermediaries can signal the true riskiness of their portfolios to liability-holders.     

Nontraditional banking activities and bank failures during the financial crisis

We test whether income from nontraditional banking activities contributed to the failures of hundreds of U.S. commercial banks during the financial crisis. Estimates from a multi-period logit model indicate that the probability of distressed bank failure declined with pure fee-based nontraditional activities such as securities brokerage and insurance sales, but increased with asset-based nontraditional activities such as venture capital, investment banking and asset securitization. Banks that engaged in risky nontraditional activities also tended to take risk in their traditional lines of business, suggesting that deregulation was neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for bank failure during the crisis.     

Do the business cycle and revenue diversification matter for banks’ capital buffer and credit risk: Evidence from ASEAN banks

We examine the association of the business cycle and revenue diversification with the banks’ capital buffer and credit risk for a sample of banks from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region from 1998 to 2018, using 2847 banking firm–year observations. We find that ASEAN region banks react anticyclically in adjusting their capital buffer levels and credit risk. We find revenue diversification benefits and that banks, through revenue diversification, can reduce their credit risk while achieving capital savings when confronting economic downturns. Our results offer support for the Basel III accord. However, the relations revealed are somewhat moderated by the regulatory quality, competition, and phase of the business cycle encountered by ASEAN region banks.     

Exporting Liquidity: Branch Banking and Financial Integration

Using exogenous liquidity windfalls from oil and natural gas shale discoveries, we demonstrate that bank branch networks help integrate U.S. lending markets. Banks exposed to shale booms enjoy liquidity inflows, which increase their capacity to originate and hold new loans. Exposed banks increase mortgage lending in nonboom counties, but only where they have branches and only for hard‐to‐securitize mortgages. Our findings suggest that contracting frictions limit the ability of arm's length finance to integrate credit markets fully. Branch networks continue to play an important role in financial integration, despite the development of securitization markets.