Corporate social responsibility and bank liquidity creation

Under the stakeholder theory hypothesis, reputable corporate social responsibility (CSR) banks are expected to attract more loans and deposits, which in turn strengthens their ability to create liquidity. Our findings support this view. Further analyses reveal that the positive effect of CSR on liquidity creation differs depending on bank size, bank capital, and type of financial crisis. In addition, deposit growth, loan growth, lending rate, and funding rate are potential channels through which CSR influences bank liquidity creation. The findings are not driven by an endogeneity issue.     

The impact of bank FinTech on liquidity creation: Evidence from China

This paper examines whether and how bank FinTech affects liquidity creation. Using panel data from Chinese commercial banks over the period 2008–2019 and bank-level FinTech indices constructed by a textual analysis method, we find robust evidence that banks with greater FinTech development create more liquidity for the public. This effect operates through deposit inflow, risk management, and cost efficiency channels. Furthermore, we find that the positive effect of bank FinTech on liquidity creation is more pronounced for banks with non-state ownership, unlisted status, and less liquidity creation.     

Climate risk and bank liquidity creation: International evidence

This study examines the impact of climate risk on bank liquidity creation in 56 countries over the period 1995–2012. Specifically, it investigates whether the relationship between climate risk and bank liquidity creation varies by bank and country characteristics. The results reveal that climate sensitivity and exposure have negative impacts on overall liquidity creation, whereas climate adaptation has positive effects. These effects are more pronounced for larger banks with lower capital, banks located in lower-GDP and developing countries, and those in Asia. The results suggest that policymakers should exercise caution when formulating and implementing climate-related strategies, as these can influence liquidity creation, which in turn can affect macroeconomic stability.     

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.     

Cyclicality of liquidity creation: Nonlinear evidence from US bank holding companies

Using a panel smooth transition regression framework on a new proxy of the business cycle (BC) index and quarterly data of US bank holding companies from 1993Q1 to 2020Q1, our results provide empirical support for the theory that the BC has a nonlinear effect on liquidity creation. We find a positive and highly significant nonlinear effect of the BC on liquidity creation, which not only supports the pro-cyclicality of liquidity creation but also improves the liquidity creation estimation compared to previous studies. The results are robust to different proxies of the BC and model specifications. We also document that US bank holding companies create liquidity more during the expansion phase (normal times) than during the recession phase (crisis times) of the BC, suggesting an asymmetrical effect of BC changes on liquidity creation. Our findings have important implications for financial market participants by suggesting that banks should keep alternative sources of funding on hand during the BC recession phase. Insights from our study also provide policy implications for central banks and prudent supervisors to consider when incentivizing banks, for instance, by lowering regulatory requirements, adjusting the policy rate, or implementing any other quantitative easing policy during the BC recession phase to keep the financial system efficient.     

Inefficient liquidity creation

We present a model in which intermediaries create liquidity by issuing safe debt. Two types of intermediaries emerge: Traditional banks that create liquidity by issuing equity and holding assets to maturity, and market-based intermediaries that create liquidity by selling assets in fire sales in downturns. We show that the reliance on market-based intermediation is necessarily too high, but liquidity creation is not. It can also be too low as the endogenous fire-sale risk can push liquidity creation below its optimum. We argue that standard capital or liquidity regulation are ineffective, and optimal macroprudential regulation should instead target market-based intermediation.     

The liquidity of bank assets and banking stability

This paper shows that an increased liquidity of bank assets, paradoxically, increases banking instability and the externalities associated with banking failures. This is because even though higher asset liquidity directly benefits stability by encouraging banks to reduce the risks on their balance sheets and by facilitating the liquidation of assets in a crisis, it also makes crises less costly for banks. As a result, banks have an incentive to take on an amount of new risk that more than offsets the positive direct impact on stability.     

A bibliometric review of liquidity creation

Liquidity creation is a core function of financial intermediation and an important factor for economic growth. Using performance and bibliometric analysis, we trace the knowledge structure of the academic research on liquidity creation conducted over 45 years. Bibliographic material from the Scopus database is used to perform co-citation, co-word, and bibliographic coupling analyses of influential aspects of the literature, such as authors, articles, journals, countries, institutions, and topics. Through content analysis, we identify three prevalent areas of research in this field of study.     

Consolidation and value creation in the insurance industry: The role of governance

We examine the long run performance of M&A transactions in the property–liability insurance industry. We specifically investigate whether such transactions create value for the bidders’ shareholders, and assess how corporate governance mechanisms, internal and external, affect such performance. Our results show that M&A create value in the long run as buy and hold abnormal returns are positive and significant after 3 years. While tender offers appear to be more profitable than mergers, our multivariate evidence does not support the conjecture that domestic transactions create more value than cross-border transactions. Furthermore, positive returns are significantly higher for frequent acquirers and in countries where investor protection is weaker. Internal corporate governance mechanisms, such as board independence, and CEO share ownership, are also significant determinants of the long run positive performance of bidders.     

Bank business models and liquidity creation

Using a large panel of US bank holding companies from 2001 to 2015, this study investigates the association between functional diversification and bank liquidity creation. I document evidence of lower liquidity creation for higher diversification. The effect of moving into nontraditional activities on liquidity creation is more apparent with large banks and less pronounced with small banks. The impact of diversification on liquidity creation is less significant during the late stage of crisis and is more clearly observed in small and medium-sized banks. Low liquidity creation banks, leveraged by a higher share of non-interest income, are more likely to further decrease their liquidity creation. The study is of interest to regulators and policymakers who are concerned about bank business models.     

Funding liquidity and bank risk taking

This study examines the relationship between funding liquidity and bank risk taking. Using quarterly data for U.S. bank holding companies from 1986 to 2014, we find evidence that banks having lower funding liquidity risk as proxied by higher deposit ratios, take more risk. A reduction in banks’ funding liquidity risk increases bank risk as evidenced by higher risk-weighted assets, greater liquidity creation and lower Z-scores. However, our results show that bank size and capital buffers usually limit banks from taking more risk when they have lower funding liquidity risk. Moreover, during the Global Financial Crisis banks with lower funding liquidity risk took less risk. The findings of this study have implications for bank regulators advocating greater liquidity and capital requirements for banks under Basel III.     

Asymmetric transmission of a bank liquidity shock

We investigate whether banks that receive a positive liquidity shock make up for the reduction in the amount of credit supplied by banks that suffer a negative liquidity shock. For identification, we use the exogenous shock to the Brazilian banking system caused by the international turmoil of 2008 that sparked a run on small and medium banks toward systemically important banks. We find that a reduction in liquidity causes banks to strongly decrease their loan supply, whereas a positive liquidity shock has a small (if any) effect on the loan supply. Our evidence shows that this asymmetric effect of liquidity on the loan supply occurs both at the intensive and the extensive margins. Our findings are consistent with the theories that predict that borrowers face switching costs and that banks tend to hold on to liquidity during periods of systemic uncertainty.     

Bank liquidity creation and real economic output

We find that bank liquidity creation (LC) is statistically and economically significantly positively related to real economic output (GDP). This is robust to using instrumental variables and many robustness checks. LC also beats bank assets in “horse races.” On-balance sheet LC matters more for small banks and off-balance sheet LC matters more for large banks. Small bank LC generates more GDP per dollar than large bank LC, but large bank LC matters more overall because large banks provide much more LC than small banks. The LC-output relation is strongest in bank-dependent industries, consistent with the hypothesized transmission mechanism.     

The dark side of liquidity creation: Leverage and systemic risk

We consider a model in which the threat of bank liquidations by creditors as well as equity-based compensation incentives both discipline bankers, but with different consequences. Greater use of equity leads to lower ex-ante bank liquidity, whereas greater use of debt leads to a higher probability of inefficient bank liquidation. The bank's privately-optimal capital structure trades off these two costs. With uncertainty about aggregate risk, bank creditors learn from other banks’ liquidation decisions. Such inference can lead to contagious liquidations, some of which are inefficient; this is a negative externality that is ignored in privately-optimal bank capital structures. Thus, under plausible conditions, banks choose excessive leverage relative to the socially optimal level, providing a rationale for bank capital regulation. While a blanket regulatory forbearance policy can eliminate contagion, it also eliminates all market discipline. However, a regulator generating its own information about aggregate risk, rather than relying on market signals, can restore efficiency and market discipline by intervening selectively.     

Economic policy uncertainty and bank liquidity hoarding

We examine the impact of economic policy uncertainty (EPU) on bank liquidity hoarding. We create a comprehensive measure of bank liquidity hoarding that takes into account asset-, liability-, and off-balance sheet activities. Using over one million bank-quarter observations, we find that in response to EPU, banks hoard liquidity overall and through all three components. This behavior is more pronounced for banks with less liquidity, more peer-bank spillover effects, and more EPU exposure. Additional analyses of interest rate spreads on several bank products suggest that our findings reflect at least in part bank choices, rather than just the reactions of customers.     

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.     

The price of liquidity: The effects of market conditions and bank characteristics

We study the prices that individual banks pay for liquidity (captured by borrowing rates in repos with the central bank and benchmarked by the overnight index swap) as a function of market conditions and bank characteristics. These prices depend in particular on the distribution of liquidity across banks, which is calculated over time using individual bank-level data on reserve requirements and actual holdings. Banks pay more for liquidity when positions are more imbalanced across banks, consistent with the existence of short squeezing. We also show that small banks pay more for liquidity and are more vulnerable to squeezes. Healthier banks pay less but, contrary to what one might expect, banks in formal liquidity networks do not. State guarantees reduce the price of liquidity but do not protect against squeezes.     

The role of bank monitoring in corporate governance: Evidence from borrowers’ earnings management behavior

In this paper, we examine the corporate governance role of banks by investigating the effect of bank monitoring on the borrowers’ earnings management behavior. Our analyses suggest that a borrowing firm’s earnings management behavior generally decreases as the strength of bank monitoring increases. The strength of bank monitoring is measured as (1) the magnitude of a bank loan, (2) the reputation (rank) of a lead bank, (3) the length of a bank loan, and (4) the number of lenders. These results imply that bank monitoring plays an important role in the corporate governance of bank-dependent firms. We further examine other bank loan characteristics (collateral, refinancing, loan types, and loan purposes) and their effects on borrowers’ earnings management behavior. Our analyses show that collateral and loan types are significantly associated with borrowers’ earnings management behavior while refinancing and loan purposes have no association.     

The impact of joint participation on liquidity in equity and syndicated bank loan markets

Market liquidity is impacted by the presence of financial intermediaries that are informed and active participants in both the equity and the syndicated bank loan markets, specifically informationally advantaged lead arrangers of syndicated bank loans that simultaneously act as equity market makers (dual market makers). Employing a two-stage procedure with instrumental variables, we identify the simultaneous equations model of liquidity and dual market maker decisions. We find that the presence of dual market makers improves the liquidity of the more competitive and transparent equity markets, but widens the spread in the less competitive over-the-counter loan market, particularly for small, informationally opaque firms.     

Types of agency cost,corporate governance and liquidity

We study the relationship between governance and liquidity when the agency costs of entrenched management and self-serving controlling shareholders are present. Using a sample of Chinese firms, we show a positive relationship between governance and liquidity. We also find striking differences between firms faced with different types of agency conflicts. Specifically, governance measures such as management compensation, controlling shareholder monitoring and board independence are more effective in lowering the bid-ask spread for state-owned enterprises prone to management entrenchment. In contrast, multiple-layer corporate structures and a higher degree of separation between control and cash flow rights are associated with higher bid-ask spreads in non-state firms characterized by self-serving controlling shareholders. Our study highlights how governance might have different liquidity effects between firms faced with different types of agency conflicts.