Search results

Maturity transformation risk is one of the leading causes of the global financial crisis. While endorsing the new Basel III liquidity reforms, the Islamic Financial Services Board has suggested a modified NSFR ratio as a structural measure for the maturity transformation function of Islamic banks, allowing for their unique balance sheet structure. The purpose of this paper is to analyze various firm-specific and macroeconomic factors that may significantly affect the maturity transformation risk of these banks.

Using an annual data set of 55 full-fledged Islamic banks from 11 different countries over a period from 2006-2015, this study utilizes a two-step system generalized method of moments estimation technique on an unbalanced panel data.

The empirical results reveal bank size, capital, less-risky liquid assets, risky liquid assets, external funding dependence and market power as significant bank-specific factors in determining maturity transformation risk. However, the authors find no evidence for the effect of bank credit risk on maturity transformation risk in Islamic banking system.

This is the first study that focuses on the measurement of maturity transformation risk and its determinants in Islamic banks in a cross-country context, with regards to new liquidity regulatory requirements as proposed by Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB) in conjunction with Basel III.

The study explores how banks design their financial structure and asset portfolio in response to monetary policy changes.

The authors conduct the research design for the Vietnamese banking market during 2007–2018. To ensure robust findings, the authors employ two econometric models of static and dynamic panels, multiple monetary policy indicators and alternative measures of bank leverage and liquidity.

Banks respond to monetary expansion by raising their financial leverage on the liability side and cutting their liquidity positions on the asset side. Further analysis suggests that larger banks' financial leverage is more responsive to monetary policy changes, while smaller banks strengthen the potency of monetary policy transmission toward bank liquidity. Additionally, the authors document that lower interest rates induce a beneficial effect on the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) under Basel III guidelines, implying that banks appear to modify the composition of liabilities to improve the stability of funding sources.

The study is the first attempt to simultaneously examine the impacts of monetary policy on both sides of bank balance sheets, across various banks of different sizes under a multiple-tool monetary regime. Besides, understanding how banks organize their stable funding sources and illiquid assets amid monetary shocks is an innovation of this study.

The paper investigates the link between uncertainty and banks' balance sheet reactions.

The study employs bank-level data in Vietnam during 2007–2019 to measure micro uncertainty in banking through the dispersion of bank-level shocks. Empirical regressions are performed by the two-step system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimator and then verified using the least squares dummy variable corrected (LSDVC) technique.

Banks tend to reduce risky loans, hoard more liquidity and decrease financial leverage in response to higher uncertainty. The relationship between uncertainty and banks' balance sheet reactions is more pronounced for banks that suffer more credit risk and overall risk, thus supporting the precautionary motive of banks. Additionally, uncertainty also leads to a decline in the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) under Basel III, implying that banks may fail to find a more stable source of funding and be more subject to maturity mismatch during periods of higher uncertainty.

The paper is the first to explore comprehensively the relationship between uncertainty and banks' balance sheet aspects as simultaneously estimated by bank loans, bank liquidity and bank leverage. While many other uncertainty measures display aggregate uncertainty sources, an important contribution in this study is to anatomize uncertainty originating exclusively from banking at a disaggregate level. Besides, shedding light on how uncertainty drives bank funding liquidity as captured by the NSFR under Basel III is entirely novel in the literature.

The purpose of this study is to investigate factors influencing the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) in the Islamic banking system. More specifically, the authors analyze the impact of the deposit structure on the liquidity ratio using the two-step generalized method of moments approach during the 2000–2014 period.

Based on IFSB-12 and the GN-6, the authors calculated the NSFR for 35 Islamic banks operating in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region.

The findings of this study show the following: first, ratio of profit-sharing investment accounts have a positive impact on the NSFR, while ratio of non profit-sharing investment accounts increase the maturity transformation risk; second, the results highlight that asset risk, bank capital and the business cycle have a positive impact on the liquidity ratio, while the returns on assets, bank size and market concentration have a negative impact; and third, these results support the IFSB’s efforts in developing guidelines for modifying the NSFR to enhance the liquidity risk management of institutions offering Islamic financial services.

The most prominent limitation of this research is the availability of data.

These results will be useful for authorities and policy makers seeking to clarify the implications of adopting the liquidity requirement for banking behavior.

This study contributes to the knowledge in this area by improving our understanding of liquidity risk management during liquidity stress periods. It analyzes the modified NSFR that was adopted by the IFSB. Besides, this study fills a gap in the literature. Previous studies have used the conventional ratios to determinate the main factors of the maturity transformation risk in a full-fledged Islamic bank based on an early version of NSFR. Finally, most studies focus on the NSFR as proposed by the Basel Committee, whereas the authors investigate the case of the dual-banking system in the emerging economies of seven Arab countries in the MENA region.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of funding liquidity risk and liquidity risk on the bank risk-taking.

This study employs a system generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation technique and a sample of 57 banks operating in BRICS countries over the period from 2006 to 2015.

The results reveal that liquidity risk has a significant and negative effect on the bank risk-taking, indicating that a decrease in liquidity risk contributes to higher bank risk-taking. The study also reveals that funding liquidity risk has the substantial impact on bank risk-taking, suggesting lower funding liquidity risk results in higher bank risk-taking. These results are consistent with prior assumptions.

The implications of this study highlight the fact that liquidity risk is a risk factor which drives the potential bank default, of which banks tend to take more risks when higher funding liquidity exists.

This study offers a number of valuable implications for the policy makers as well as practitioners. The policy makers should take into account better liquidity risk management framework aimed at preventing banks from taking excessive risks. Bank executives must pay more attention on how banks could hold more liquid securities and cash. Less risk-taking reduces higher borrowing costs undermining earnings through imposing taxes on corporate.

This work uncovered that liquidity risk per se is an important and previously unidentified risk factor, specifically its effects on bank risk-taking and contributes to the view in support of holding more liquid securities than the past.

This paper aims to investigate the potential impact of the Basel III liquidity requirements, namely, the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) and the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), on bank liquidity creation.

The authors developed a dynamic panel model using the Quasi-Maximum Likelihood estimation on an unbalanced panel dataset of 129 commercial banks operating in 10 Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) countries from 2009 to 2017.

The results show that the NSFR significantly negatively affects liquidity creation. Similarly, the LCR exerts a substantial negative impact on the liquidity creation of the sampled MENA banks. These findings suggest that complying with both liquidity requirements tends to curtail liquidity creation. Moreover, further regression analysis of large and small bank sub-samples uncovered results similar to the overall MENA sample.

The findings raise interesting policy implications and suggest a trade-off between the benefits of the financial resiliency induced by implementing liquidity requirements and the creation of liquidity essential for promoting economic growth in the region.

Most empirical research focuses on the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation. To the knowledge, this paper is the first to provide empirical evidence on the effect of both the NSFR and LCR regulatory liquidity standards on bank liquidity creation in the MENA region.

This paper aims to discuss the money creation mechanisms in emerging markets with special focus on external transactions and outlines the implications for monetary policy and financial stability issues.

To make the argument, the authors analyze a historical episode of flows of funds in Korea and Russia and conduct a canonical correlation analysis for a cross-section of emerging market economies.

The authors show that changes in the net foreign assets of the banking system are associated with (or cause) deposits fluctuations. In emerging markets, however, the scope of such fluctuations is limited unless driven by changes in the foreign reserves of a central bank.

Some preliminary implications for financial stability implementation may be drawn from this analysis. Introducing the net stable funding ratio requirement is unlikely to have any significant destabilizing effect on credit creation in emerging markets (in this regard, it is similar to the restriction on banks’ foreign currency position, which is a common prudential measure). Instead, it is likely to trigger a balance of payment adjustment that is similar to that experienced by an economy during its transition from fixed to flexible exchange rate regime.

Capital, risk and liquidity are the vitality of the banking industry, which can improve the efficiency of banking and promote the efficiency of resource allocation. The purpose of this study is to examine how Basel III new liquidity ratios affect bank capital and risk adjustments and how banks respond to the new liquidity rules.

The authors adopted the system generalized method of moments (GMM) to examine how Basel III new liquidity ratios affect bank capital and risk adjustments and how banks respond to the new liquidity rules. Based on the call reports data from banks, GMM was used to test the hypotheses that new liquidity ratios affect bank capital and risk adjustments, as well as how banks respond to the regulation.

The results indicate banks targeted capital, risk and liquidity and simultaneously coordinate short-term adjustments in capital and risk. New liquidity measures enable banks to coordinate risk and liquidity decisions. Short-term adjustments in new liquidity rules inversely impact bank capital. Short-term adjustments in new liquidity rules inversely impact bank capital and capital adjustments adversely affect changes in the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR).

The primary results revealed that Ghanaian banks simultaneously coordinate and target capital, risk exposure and liquidity level. Also, capital adjustments positively influence risk adjustments and vice versa while bidirectional negative coordination exists between bank capital and risk on one hand and liquidity on the other hand. Short-term adjustments in new liquidity rule inversely impact bank capital and capital adjustments adversely affect changes in the LCR. The findings partially confirm the theoretical predictions of Repullo (2005) regarding the negative links between capital, risk and liquidity but the authors have higher capital induces higher risk.

Banks should balance off their targeted risk and liquidity in order not to sacrifice capital accumulation for liquidity.

This research offers new contributions in the research of bank management of capital and liquidity toward banks during a financial crisis from a theoretical perspective and trust management from an applicative perspective.

Basel III and the capital stress testing introduced new requirements and new definitions while retaining the structure of the pre-2010 requirements. The total number of requirements increased, making it difficult to determine which and how many constraints are binding. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the new financial regulations in the post-financial crisis period, focusing on the capital and liquidity regulations.

The authors explore the impact of financial regulations using various data sources – financial and accounting data from Y-9C Reports. Market data such as daily bond trading from TRACE through the Wharton Data Research Services and Treasury yield from the Bloomberg. The authors use regression analysis to examine the roles of capital adequacy and liquidity regulations.

The authors’ analysis in this paper suggest that Basel III, CET1 and Level 1 HQLAs requirements post-financial crisis have reshaped the balance sheets of large financial institutions, with some differential impacts on traditional versus capital markets banks. These changes appear to respond to the binding constraints (CET1 being a preponderance of required regulatory capital, Level 1 HQLAs a majority of required HQLAs and the expense of both) created by these new requirements, which also appear to have constrained asset growth at such institutions. Consistent with the authors’ view, their results suggest that the new requirements are less constraining for large traditional banks (such institutions show a rapid increase in CET1 capital to steady-state levels by 2012 and strong retail deposit rebuilding resulting in a relatively low required HQLA) and much more so, particularly the liquidity requirement, for the capital markets banks (such institutions show continuous building of CET1 capital over the post-crisis observation period, declines in the share of trading assets and increases in the share of HQLAs combined with efforts to increase retail deposits). Credit risk spreads rose dramatically during the financial crisis of 2008-2009. Although decreased, they remain higher and with greater dispersion (for both groups of banks) than pre-crisis. Preliminary regression analysis suggests that the market responds to changes in measured liquidity, rather than the regulatory capital ratios, when pricing bank risk (as reflected on bond spreads).

The estimation is based on historical relationship in the data. We must be cautious in extrapolating the results in a different environment.

There appears to be an arbitrage between HQLA and retail deposits. Capital markets banks and traditional banks follow different business models as evident in the analysis in this paper.

Market pricing suggests that the liquidity measures are more transparent and easier to understand. Capital ratios are not as easy to interpret.

Original research. To the authors’ knowledge, there is no paper that examines impacts of capital and liquidity regulations after the crisis at capital markets banks vs traditional banks – using both accounting data and market data.

While previous literature has emphasized the causal relationship from liquidity to capital, the impact of interbank network characteristics on this relationship remains unclear. By applying the interbank network simulation, this paper aims to examine whether the causal relationship between capital and liquidity is influenced by bank positions in the interbank network.

Using the sample of 506 commercial banks established in 28 European countries from 2001 to 2013, the author adopts the generalized method of moments simultaneous equations approach to investigate whether interbank network characteristics influence the causal relationship between bank capital and liquidity.

Drawing on a sample of commercial banks from 28 European countries, this study suggests that the interconnectedness of banks within interbank loan and deposit networks shapes their decisions to establish higher or lower regulatory capital ratios in the face of increased illiquidity. These findings support the implementation of minimum liquidity ratios alongside capital ratios, as advocated by the Basel Committee on Banking Regulation and Supervision. In addition, the paper underscores the importance of regulatory authorities considering the network characteristics of banks in their oversight and decision-making processes.

This paper makes a valuable contribution to the current body of research by examining the influence of interbank network characteristics on the relationship between a bank’s capital and liquidity. The findings provide insights that add to the ongoing discourse on regulatory frameworks and emphasize the necessity of customized approaches that consider the varied interbank network positions of banks.