Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of leverage, regulatory capital and tier-I capital ratios on the ex ante and ex post risk of Japanese banks.

To test the hypotheses, the authors have implemented a panel of 507 commercial and cooperative banks of Japan over the period extending from 2001 to 2020, using a two-step system Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) framework.

The overall sample banks' results show that the impact of leverage, regulatory capital and tier-I capital ratios on ex ante and ex post risk is positive. The findings reveal that the effects of regulatory and tier-I capital ratios on ex post risk are negative (positive) for commercial (cooperative) banks, high-liquid, low-liquid and high-growth banks in Japan. In addition, the regulatory capital ratio is more beneficial for risk due to its power to absorb losses. The lagged coefficient indicates that banks require more time to adjust their ex post and ex ante risk during crisis period than during normal economic conditions.

The heterogeneity in results has practical implications for regulators, policymakers and bank managers in formulating the capital requirement guidelines with respect to ex ante and ex post risk across different categories and characteristics of banks.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study investigating the impact of leverage, regulatory capital and tier-I capital ratios on the ex ante and ex-post risk of Japanese commercial and cooperative banks over the period from 2001 to 2020. The insights into the impact of leverage, regulatory capital and tier-I capital ratios on the ex ante and ex post risk of well-capitalized, under-capitalized, high and low-liquid banks are new in the context of Japan.

This study aims to understand how quickly Japanese banks readjust their capital ratios (leverage, regulatory capital, tier-I capital and common equity) following an economic shock.

This study uses a two-step system GMM framework to test the study's hypotheses using the annual data of Japanese commercial and cooperative banks ranging from 2005 to 2020.

The findings show that banks adjust their leverage ratio faster than regulatory capital, tier-I capital and common equity ratios. In addition to that, the results reveal that the speed of capital adjustment is higher for commercial banks than for cooperative banks, suggesting higher economic costs and implications for commercial banks. Furthermore, it is worth noting that well-capitalised (under-capitalised) banks tend to prioritise the adjustments to common equity (leverage) before considering the adjustments to leverage (common equity). According to the results, high-liquid (low-liquid) banks alter their regulatory capital and tier-I capital ratios (leverage) more quickly (more slowly) than low-liquid (high-liquid) banks.

The findings suggest that when formulating and implementing new banking regulations, particularly in assessing and adjusting specific capital requirements under Pillar II of Basel III, management (including bankers, regulators and policymakers) should consider the heterogeneity observed in the rate of capital adjustment across various bank characteristics. Additionally, bank managers should also consider the speed of adjustment when determining optimal half-life and target capital structures.

To the author's knowledge, this study represents a pioneering investigation into the rate of adjustment of capital ratios (leverage, regulatory, tier-I and common equity) within Japan's banking sector. The study employs a comprehensive dataset encompassing both commercial and cooperative banks to facilitate this analysis. A notable contribution to the existing body of literature, this study offers a detailed analysis and emphasises the varying degrees of adjustment in capital ratios. The study also highlights the heterogeneous nature of the adjustment rate in these ratios by categorising the data into well-capitalised, under-capitalised, highly liquid and low-liquid banks.

This paper aims to examine the performance metrics of Saudi banks against the background of the proportion of foreign ownership.

One of the empirical challenges in addressing small developing markets is the analysis of small samples. The current study looks at a population of ten publicly traded banks in Saudi Arabia over a two‐year period. While the results of traditional parametric tests of difference are reported, the study also employs more robust distribution free non‐parametric tests of differences in location measures between the two groups.

Surprisingly though, the evidence provided in this paper shows that while banks with foreign ownership are indeed more aggressive in terms of capital structure, loan portfolios and regulatory tier 1 capital, they are unable to translate these into higher performance outcomes.

One limitation is drawing inferences from small samples. The study overcomes this by using non‐parametric methods.

The study provides potential investors in the Middle‐Eastern region with information about the banking sector in Saudi Arabia.

The results of the study may provide banking regulators with insights into the behavior of foreign owned banks in developing countries.

This is the first study that looks at this very important sector in the largest country within the GCC.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the literature on minority-owned commercial banks in the USA.

The authors examine performance differences between African-American (AA) commercial banks and other minority (OM)-owned banks. Also, the authors compare AA bank performance with that of their peer-group banking institutions.

Employing data both before and after the recessionary period of 2008-2009, the authors find significant performance differences between minority ownership categories. For example, prior to 2008, AA banks held a significant advantage over OM-owned banks in net interest income as a percentage of average assets. This competitive advantage was somewhat offset by relatively weak loan portfolios and failure to contain costs. The 2008 crisis served to exacerbate the negatives of African-American banks while their positive differences essentially disappeared.

The focus is different than the previous studies on minority-owned banks. The authors are especially interested in how AA banks have fared – relative to banking industry peer institutions, but also, relative to OM-owned banks.

Poland has made rapid economic advancement since introducing its shock therapy program January 1,1990. Inflation is now below 22 percent and real growth exceeds 5.1 percent. Poland's future will be highly dependent on the development of its financial institutions. The commercial banks that had been branches of the National Bank of Poland and several other major banks are leading the privatization process. Five banks have been privatized and others will follow shortly. Cooperative — twinning — arrangements are being developed to provide international banking expertise and financial support for Poland's commercial banks. The profit maximizing financial institutions will be the primary vehicles to fund the development of Poland's market‐based economy. The privatized institutions will support the planned initial public offerings and joint business arrangements that are developing with western companies.

The purpose of this paper is to focus on the “Basel Illusion”, the belief that a model-driven quantitative approach to capital adequacy can lead to a more robust and shock-proof system. The author analyzes the Basel framework and its role as a major source of systemic risk. Furthermore, the Basel framework is unlikely to enhance the safety of the financial system and prevent future crises. As such, Basel should be scrapped and regulators should revert to a simple tangible common equity (TCE) leverage rule.

The paper aims to review the extensive existing literature and analytic approach to the problem, trying to answer the question: why Basel? The paper looks at the Basel methodology of calculating risk-weighed assets.

The paper looks at the basic reasons underlying the Basel failure: complexity, variations in measurement of risk-weighed assets across banking institutions, ability to game the system and amplification of systemic risk. The research concludes that a simple TCE leverage rule is superior to Basel in controlling systemic risk.

Further research will be needed in determining the “optimal” level of capital.

Regulators and bankers should seek simplicity in capital rules. The dubious use of quantitative models can only lead to spurious precision.

This article synthesizes an extensive body of work on the issue of bank capital to demonstrate the superiority of a simple capital rule.

Introduction: The COVID-19 crisis is a major shock to the global economy, with serious repercussions on financial markets. Most economies, especially high-income ones, have made considerable efforts, including financial ones, to stimulate aggregate demand in the face of a loss of income on the one hand and to maintain the production potential of companies on the other. This fact required the intervention through various instruments on the money market, but also the mention of the money creation capacity of the banks through the lending mechanism. Apparently, this should have affected the stability of banking systems by increasing the credit risk assumed, but this was avoided because banks are better capitalised and the regulatory framework, including the macroprudential one, was strengthened after the financial crisis of 2007–2009. Therefore, the national authorities had sufficient leeway to respond to the recession and market instability caused by the pandemic by relaxing prudential requirements.

Aim: A theoretical review of literature and good practice of developed banking systems on how macroprudential policy can supplement expansionary monetary policy in overcoming the pandemic crisis. Identifying the risks for the excessive use of relaxed macroprudentialism and formalising recommendations to combine it with monetary policy instruments to overcome stressful situations for banking systems.

Method: In order to study the subject approached in this chapter, there were applied the following research methods, such as analysis and synthesis of conceptual approaches of macroprudentiality and the tools they use, deduction and induction, in order to elucidate the influencing factors using the relaxation of macroprudentiality in the context of pandemic crisis and research on the high-income states experience in order to formulate conclusions and opinions.

Findings: The authors find that countries have responded quickly to the outbreak of the crisis by easing capital and liquidity requirements, or at least refraining from the previously planned tightening. At the same time, the authors noticed that loan-based measures and minimum reserve requirements were rarely relaxed and risk weights were not changed at all.

Originality of the Study: The correlation of different monetary and macroprudential policy instruments in the need to relax them, the analysis of possible risks and the formulation of conclusions on the usefulness of applying these methods to solve the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Implications: Our results suggest that the macroprudential instruments can only be applied if banking systems have previously succeeded in consolidating the capitalisation of banks. A restrictive macroprudential policy can create premises for the use of excess capital in situations such as that generated by the pandemic, but it is recommended only to economies where overregulation does not affect development in periods of normal evolution.

The present study assesses the commercial bank profit efficiency and its relationship to banking sector competition in a rapidly growing emerging economy, India from 2009 to 2019 using stochastic frontier analysis (SFA).

Lerner indices, conventional and efficiency-adjusted, quantify competition. Two SFA models are employed to calculate alternative profit efficiency (inefficiency) scores: the two-step time-decay approach proposed by Battese and Coelli (1992) and the recently developed single-step pairwise difference estimator (PDE) by Belotti and Ilardi (2018). In the first step of the BC92 framework, profit inefficiency is calculated, and in the second step, Tobit and Fractional Regression Model (FRM) are utilized to evaluate profit inefficiency correlates. PDE concurrently solves the frontier and inefficiency equations using the maximum likelihood process.

The results suggest that foreign banks are less profit efficient than domestic equivalents, supporting the “home-field advantage” hypothesis in India. Further, increasing competition drives bank managers to make riskier lending and investment choices, decreasing bank profit efficiency. However, this effect varies depending on bank ownership and size.

Literature on the competition bank efficiency link is conspicuously scant, with a focus on technical and cost efficiency. Less is known regarding the influence of competition on bank profit efficiency. The article is one of the first to examine commercial bank profit efficiency and its relationship to banking sector competition. Additionally, the study work represents one of the first applications of the FRM presented by Papke and Wooldridge (1996) and the PDE provided by Belotti and Ilardi (2018).

Using cross-country data on the 1,000 largest global banks for 2019, the paper aims to examine the response of bank risk and returns to the pandemic.

The author employs weighted least squares (WLS) techniques for the purposes of analysis.

The findings suggest that banks with Islamic windows increased their riskiness in response to the pandemic, although there was not much impact on profitability. Additionally, the author categorizes banks based on certain major characteristics and find that these findings are manifest primarily for well-capitalized and less liquid banks.

Research as to the impact of the pandemic on banks' balance sheets has been an unaddressed area of research. By focusing on a large sample of banks across countries with both Islamic and conventional banking presence, the analysis sheds light on the balance sheet response of banks to the pandemic, an aspect that has not been addressed earlier.

The pre‐commitment approach to bank capital regulation proposes that banks self‐select capital reserve requirements, facing penalties ex post for incurring losses in excess of reserves, hence providing incentives for high‐ risk banks to choose higher capital requirements. In order to assess the validity of the pre‐commitment approach, this article analyzes its comparative statics within the context of a standard European option written against the bank's capital base. The author finds that this approach works when it is not needed (when banks possess unlimited capital and hence cannot fail), but not when it is.