融资流动性对商业银行资产配置行为的动态影响

使用14家上市银行2007~2013年季度数据建立面板向量自回归(PVAR)模型,运用脉冲响应函数分析融资流动性对银行资产配置行为的动态影响。研究结果表明：存款成本和银行间融资成本的上升,会激励银行增加风险资产,减少流动性储备,不利于银行防范结构性流动性风险;存款流失会削弱银行贷款扩张的动力,提升流动性偏好;同业融资依赖性的上升短期内可以改善银行资产的流动性,长期则会加大资金借短贷长的问题,为流动性危机埋下隐患。     

Liquidity Coinsurance and Bank Capital

Banks can deal with their liquidity risk by holding liquid assets (self‐insurance), by participating in interbank markets (coinsurance), or by using flexible financing instruments, such as bank capital (risk sharing). We use a simple model to show that undiversifiable liquidity risk, that is, the liquidity risk that banks are unable to coinsure on interbank markets, represents an important risk factor affecting their capital structures. Banks facing higher undiversifiable liquidity risk hold more capital. We posit that, empirically, banks that are more exposed to undiversifiable liquidity risk are less active on interbank markets. Therefore, we test for the existence of a negative relationship between bank capital and interbank market activity and find support in a large sample of U.S. commercial banks.     

Network reactions to banking regulations

Optimal regulatory restrictions on banks have to solve a delicate balance. Tighter regulations reduce the likelihood of banks’ distress. Looser regulations foster the allocation of funds toward productive investments. With multiple banks, optimal regulation becomes even more challenging. Banks form partnerships in the interbank lending market in order to face liquidity needs and to meet investment possibilities. We show that the interbank network can suddenly collapse when regulations are pushed beyond a critical level, with a discontinuous increase in systemic risk as the cross-insurance of banks collapses.     

Correlated bank runs,interbank markets and reserve requirements

This article extends the application of global games of Goldstein and Pauzner (2005) in the banking model of Diamond and Dybvig (1983) to account for correlation in the quality of banks’ long term investment, when banks are linked through cross deposits and there is a central bank. The goal is to study how these elements affect the deposit contract that banks offer to depositors and the ex ante probability of a bank run. We show that the coexistence of a central bank, which determines banks’ reserve requirements, and an interbank market, which redistributes reserves, leads to a smaller probability of a bank run and to fewer inefficient bank runs, relative to the case with no central bank and no interbank market. By adequately choosing the level of reserves to store, the central bank can improve the equilibrium outcome and allow banks to offer a higher interim payment to depositors, relative to the situation with no cross deposits.     

On the efficiency of bilateral interbank insurance

This paper studies banks’ incentives to engage in liquidity cross-insurance. In contrast to previous literature we view interbank insurance as the outcome of bilateral (and non-exclusive) contracting between pairs of banks and ask whether this outcome is socially efficient. Using a simple model of interbank insurance we find that this is indeed the case when insurance takes place through pure transfers. This is even though liquidity support among banks sometimes breaks down, as observed in the crisis of 2007–2008. However, when insurance is provided against some form of repayment (such as is the case, for example, with credit lines), banks have a tendency to insure each other less than the socially efficient amount. We show that efficiency can be restored by introducing seniority clauses for interbank claims or through subsidies that resemble government interbank lending guarantees.     

Balancing liquidity and returns through interbank markets: Endogenous interest rates and network structures

In this article, we develop a model of interbank lending based on liquidity and return on equity considerations of homogeneous banks. We derive the reservation prices of interbank lending and its properties before exploring how, because of an idiosyncratic liquidity shock, banks engage in bilateral lending to form an interbank network. We establish that the resulting networks exhibit realistic properties, including a core-periphery structure. Banks in the core and the periphery of this network differ not only in the amounts of interbank lending and borrowing but also in the interest rates applied to their transactions.     

Can banks default overnight? Modelling endogenous contagion on the O/N interbank market

We propose a new model of the liquidity-driven banking system focusing on overnight interbank loans. This significant branch of the interbank market is commonly neglected in the banking system modelling and systemic risk analysis. We construct a model where banks are allowed to use both the interbank and the securities markets to manage their liquidity demand and supply as driven by prudential requirements in a volatile environment. The network of interbank loans is dynamic and simulated every day. We show how the intrasystem cash fluctuations alone, without any external shocks, may lead to systemic defaults, and what may be a symptom of the self-organized criticality of the system. We also analyze the impact of different prudential regulations and market conditions on the interbank market resilience. We confirm that the central bank’s asset purchase programmes, limiting the declines in government bond prices, can successfully stabilize banks’ liquidity demands. The model can be used to analyze the interbank market impact of macroprudential tools.     

Money and liquidity in financial markets

We argue that there is a connection between the interbank market for liquidity and the broader financial markets, which has its basis in demand for liquidity by banks. Tightness in the market for liquidity leads banks to engage in what we term “liquidity pull-back,” which involves selling financial assets either by banks directly or by levered investors. Empirical tests on the stock market are supportive. Tighter interbank markets are associated with relatively more volume in more liquid stocks; selling pressure, especially in more liquid stocks; and transitory negative returns. We control for market-wide uncertainty and in the process also contribute to the literature on portfolio rebalancing. Our general point is that money matters in financial markets.     

Interbank market liquidity and central bank intervention

We develop a simple model of the interbank market where banks trade a long term, safe asset. When there is a lack of opportunities for banks to hedge idiosyncratic and aggregate liquidity shocks, the interbank market is characterized by excessive price volatility. In such a situation, a central bank can implement the constrained efficient allocation by using open market operations to fix the short term interest rate. It can be constrained efficient for banks to hoard liquidity and stop trading with each other if there is sufficient uncertainty about aggregate liquidity demand compared to idiosyncratic liquidity demand.     

Liquidity Risk,Bank Networks,and the Value of Joining the Federal Reserve System

Reducing systemic liquidity risk related to seasonal loan demand was one reason for founding the Federal Reserve System. Nevertheless, less than 8% of state‐chartered banks joined the Fed in its first decade. Banks facing high liquidity risk from seasonal loan demand were more likely to join the Fed in its first decade. We also find evidence consistent with the notion that banks could obtain some indirect access to the discount window through interbank transfers. Some banks apparently joined the Fed to pass through discount window liquidity to other banks via the interbank network.  Joining the Fed increased member banks’ lending.     

Interbank market failure and macro-prudential policies

This paper analyses the effects of several macro-prudential policy measures on the banking sector and its linkages to the macroeconomy. We employ a dynamic general equilibrium model with sticky prices, in which banks trade excess funds in the interbank lending market. We find that an increase in the liquidity requirement effectively reduces the impact of an interbank shock on the real and financial sector, while an increased capital requirement propagates only through nominal variables as inflation and interest rates. We conclude that stricter liquidity measures which limit inside money creation, dampen the severity of a breakdown in interbank lending. Targeting interbank financing directly through liquidity measures along with a moderate capital requirement generates lower welfare losses. We thereby provide a comprehensive rationale in favor of the regulatory measures in Basel III.     

Bank market power,asset liquidity and funding liquidity: International evidence

Our investigation of the association between bank market power and liquidity in 101 countries reveals that a bank's initial gains of market power lead to increases in bank liquidity, but does so at a diminishing rate. Beyond an empirically determined threshold, further increases in market power are inversely associated with bank liquidity. From a cross-sectional viewpoint, banks that lack market power hold more liquid assets and are net lenders in the interbank market. In contrast, dominant banks hold less liquid assets and are net interbank borrowers. For a given level of market power, ceteris paribus, developed nation banks hold less asset liquidity and obtain more interbank funding liquidity than their developing country peers. These results remain equally relevant during the 2007–2009 global financial crisis (GFC).     

Managing markets for toxic assets

A model in which banks trade toxic assets to raise funds for investment is analyzed. Toxic assets generate an adverse selection problem and, consequently, the interbank asset market provides insufficient liquidity. Investment is inefficiently low because acquiring funding requires banks to sell high-quality assets for less than their “fair” value. Equity injections reduce liquidity and may be counterproductive as a policy for increasing investment. Paradoxically, if it is directed to firms with the greatest liquidity needs, an equity injection will reduce investment further. Asset purchase programs, like the Public–Private Investment Program, often have favorable impacts on liquidity, investment and welfare.     

An early warning indicator system to monitor the unsecured interbank funds market

A core goal of regulators and financial authorities is to understand how market prices convey information on the financial health of its participants. From this viewpoint we build an Early-Warning Indicators System (EWIS) that allows for identifying those financial institutions perceived as risky counterparts by the participants of the interbank market. We use micro-level data from bilateral overnight unsecured loans performed in the interbank market between January 2011 and December 2014. The EWIS identifies those participants that systematically pay high prices for liquidity in this market. We employ coverage tests to estimate EWIS’ robustness and consistency. We find that financial institutions with an elevated frequency of signals tend to exhibit a net borrower liquidity position in the interbank market, hence suggesting they are facing recurrent liquidity needs. Those institutions also exhibit higher probability of insolvency measured by the Z-score indicator. Thus, our results support the existence of market discipline based on peer-monitoring. Overall, the EWIS may assist financial authorities in focusing their attention and resources on those financial institutions perceived by the market as those closer to distress.     

Stressed,Not Frozen: The Federal Funds Market in the Financial Crisis

We examine the importance of liquidity hoarding and counterparty risk in the U.S. overnight interbank market during the financial crisis of 2008. Our findings suggest that counterparty risk plays a larger role than does liquidity hoarding: the day after Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy, loan terms become more sensitive to borrower characteristics. In particular, poorly performing large banks see an increase in spreads of 25 basis points, but are borrowing 1% less, on average. Worse performing banks do not hoard liquidity. While the interbank market does not freeze entirely, it does not seem to expand to meet latent demand.     

Systemic liquidity shortages and interbank network structures

This paper aims to shed light on the systemic nature of liquidity risk and to propose a method for calculating systemic liquidity shortages. Our method incorporates not only direct liquidity shortages but also indirect liquidity shortages due to the knock-on effects through interbank linkages. We perform a simulation with a simple banking system model and find that a deficit bank can mitigate a liquidity shortage by holding more claims on a surplus bank. Meanwhile, a greater imbalance in liquidity positions across banks tends to aggravate the liquidity shortage of a deficit bank. According to comparative analysis between different types of network structures, a core-periphery network with a deficit money center bank gives rise to the highest level of systemic liquidity shortage, and a banking system becomes more vulnerable to liquidity shocks as its interbank network becomes more ill-matched.     

Does lending relationship help or alleviate the transmission of liquidity shocks? Evidence from a liquidity crunch in China

We examine China’s June 2013 liquidity crunch as a negative shock to banks and analyze the wealth effects on exchange-listed firms. Our findings suggest that liquidity shocks to financial institutions negatively impact borrower performance, particularly borrowers reporting outstanding loans at the end of 2012. Stock valuations of firms with long-term bank relationships, however, outperform the market and experience smaller subsequent declines in investment than peers lacking solid banking relationships. This effect is the strongest for firms that enjoy good relations with China’s large state-owned banks or foreign banks, and weakest for firms whose connections are solely with local banks. We document a positive correlation between the stock performances of firms and the stock performances of lender banks and the likelihood of lender banks operating as net lenders in the interbank market. These results suggest that banks transmit liquidity shocks to their borrowing firms and that a long-term bank-firm relationship may mitigate the negative effects of a liquidity shock.     

Aggregate liquidity shortages, idiosyncratic liquidity smoothing and banking regulation

This paper develops a model of banking fragility driven by aggregate liquidity shortages. Inefficiencies arise from a failure of the interbank market to smooth the available liquidity in such a shortage. We find that a standard lender of last resort policy is ineffective in restoring efficiency as it leads to offsetting changes in the banks’ supply of liquidity. In contrast, subsidizing the purchase of assets from troubled banks increases welfare by improving the banks’ liquidity holdings. The first best, however, is achieved by redistributing existing liquidity from healthy to troubled banks in a crisis.     

货币政策对银行间市场流动性影响效应的实证研究及启示

银行间货币市场是央行实施货币政策的重要平台，研究货币政策对银行间市场流动性的影响对于完善商业银行日常流动性管理具有重要意义。文章在设定银行间市场流动性测度指标与梳理货币政策工具对市场流动性的影响机制的基础上，分别使用事件分析法和时间序列模型对不同政策工具的影响效应进行实证分析，得出相关分析结论，并总结其对于完善商业银行日常流动性管理的启示。     

Lending relationships in the interbank market

We use a unique dataset to show that relationships are an important determinant of banks' ability to access interbank market liquidity. More precisely, we find that: (i) banks with a larger reserve imbalance are more likely to borrow funds from banks with whom they have a relationship, and to pay a lower interest rate than otherwise; (ii) smaller banks and banks with more non-performing loans tend to have limited access to international markets, and rely more on relationships; (iii) relationships are established between banks with less correlated liquidity shocks. These results suggest that relationships allow banks to insure liquidity risk in the presence of market frictions such as transaction and information costs. Our analysis explicitly controls for the endogeneity of bank relationships.