Search results

This study aims to investigate the relationship between return and liquidity risk and the impact of the prospect theory value (PTV) as a moderator variable on this relationship.

The statistical population of this study is the companies listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange during the years 2006–2019. In this research, the portfolio construction method and alpha analysis of the factor models and the cross-sectional regression of Fama and Macbeth have been used to analyze the data.

The results obtained through the portfolio construction method and the cross-sectional regression of Fama and Macbeth show that there is no significant relationship between return and Amihud (2002) criterion (ILLIQ) as liquidity risk. The PTV also does not affect this relationship, but there is a positive and significant relationship between returns and the turnover ratio (TOR) as liquidity risk. In other words, the lower the TOR (higher liquidity risk), the lower the return. On the other hand, the results showed that the PTV affects this relationship.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to examine the effect of the PTV on the relationship between return and liquidity risk. It is expected that the results of this study can help investors explain returns better through a deeper understanding of the behavior of investors and their decision-making methods. In other words, by examining the PTV as a proxy for behavioral dimension, we can understand that the relationship between return and liquidity risk can be affected by other dimensions like PTV, so when evaluating risk and return, other influential factors should also be considered.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate post‐crisis measures banks have adopted in a bid to manage liquidity risk. It is based on the fact that the financial liquidity market was greatly affected during the recent economic turmoil and financial meltdown. During the crisis, liquidity risk management disclosure was crucial for confidence building in market participants.

The study investigates if Basel II pillar 3 disclosures on liquidity risk management are applied by 20 of top 33 world banks. Bank selection is based on information availability, geographic balance and comprehensiveness of the language in which information is provided. This information is searched from the World Wide Web, with a minimum of one hour allocated to “content search”, and indefinite time for “content analyses”. Such content scrutiny is guided by 16 disclosure principles classified in four main categories.

Only 25 per cent of sampled banks provide publicly accessible liquidity risk management information, a clear indication that in the post‐crisis era, many top ranking banks still do not take Basel disclosure norms seriously, especially the February 2008 pre‐crisis warning by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision.

Bank stakeholders should easily have access to information on liquidity risk management. Banks falling‐short of making such information available might not inspire confidence in market participants in events of financial panic and turmoil. As in the run‐up to the previous financial crisis, if banks are not compelled to explicitly and expressly disclose what measures they adopt in a bid to guarantee stakeholder liquidity, the onset of any financial shake‐up would only precipitate a meltdown. The main limitation of this study is the use of the World Wide Web as the only source of information available to bank stakeholders and/or market participants.

The contribution of this paper to literature can be viewed from the role it plays in investigating post‐crisis measures banks have adopted in a bid to inform stakeholders on their management of liquidity risk.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of discretionary loan loss provisions (DLLPs) and non-performing loans (NPLs) on the liquidity risk of both Islamic banks (IBs) and conventional banks (CBs) before and after the global crisis that hit nations belonging to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).

This empirical study uses balanced panel data on 16 IBs and 58 CBs operating in the six Gulf Cooperation states covering 2000–2014. The data were obtained from the Bankscope database and the banks’ annual reports.

The results indicate that NPLs affect liquidity risk differently across the banks – specifically, there is a significant difference in the funding and managing of liquidity between the two bank types. The authors find that the influence of DLLPs does not vary across the banks in the overall analysis and before the crisis. This finding provides insights into the unique nature of banking risks in dual banking systems. The authors also find that after the crisis, the discretionary LLPs affected liquidity risk differently across the banks.

This study has several practical implications. First, the findings suggest that the Islamic Financial Services Board and other IBs regulators should reassess several regulations, principles and products in order to reduce their credit and liquidity risks. Second, the study emphasizes the need for banks to perform a careful assessment of the effects of their LLP policies. Finally, the findings are also relevant to bankers, as they provide empirical evidence on the effect of loan growth on bank liquidity, suggesting that bankers should improve their loan management.

First, this is the first study to examine discretionary LLPs, NPLs and liquidity risk in IBs; it is also the first comparative study between Islamic and CBs. Second, the study provides evidence on how the global crisis impacted the banking sector and identifies some of the main determinants of liquidity risk for both Islamic and CBs operating in GCC countries.

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.

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 liquidity of direct real estate has been surrounded by mystery. Research in the USA and in the UK has contributed much to clarify the liquidity issue of direct real estate. In The Netherlands, not much research exists on this issue; however, a major ALM advisory firm in The Netherlands suggests a liquidity factor of 1.5 times the standard deviation of the ROZ/IPD real estate index, leading to a 50 percent higher risk compared to the current ROZ/IPD real estate index risk. This paper aims to investigate this issue.

The paper investigates whether this is a reasonable assumption by approaching the issue from several perspectives. First, the transaction process, the effects of heterogeneity and the size of the property are reviewed. The market risk between the date of the decision to sell the property and the date on which it was actually sold is also reviewed. The last element reviewed is the reallocation risk, in other words missed opportunities that have arisen because it could take longer to sell property than to sell stocks or bonds. Extensive anonymous information from the main institutional investors in The Netherlands is used, as well as interviews with the main brokers in The Netherlands. The survey is placed in an international context by comparing the results as well as the methods to previous surveys in the UK.

As a result suggestions are presented about risk premiums as a protection against the liquidity risks which turn out to be quite low, much lower than the 50 percent increase of the risk premium on top of the ROZ/IPD real estate index's standard deviation of the total return. The results are compared to risk premiums for stocks and bonds at times of high and average returns.

So far not many surveys have been done on this subject using the bottom up approach. If there were, those have been looked at in the literature review. The unique ROZ/IPD databank allows us to come up with real quantitative results related to the different types of real estate liquidity risks. The paper has identified five of those. The survey is restricted to results in a growing market because of the time frame and it is strongly recommended to repeat it after a depressed market.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically assess the impact of the principle of profit- and loss-sharing (PLS) on the exposure to liquidity risk of Islamic banks in Gulf Corporation Council (GCC) countries. The Islamic bank activity is distinguished by a PLS principle, which is likely to involve specificities in the bank liquidity issue.

This paper investigates the determinants of Islamic bank liquidity over the period 2005–2016 using a panel of 23 Islamic banks in GCC. The system of generalized method of moment estimators is applied.

The findings reveal that while profit-sharing investment accounts (PSIAs) are inversely proportional to Islamic bank liquidity, the PLS investment does not seem to act as a determinant of the bank liquidity. The fact that PSIAs are globally short-run accounts, but finance long-run projects leads to a substantial maturity mismatches, which limits the availability of liquidity buffer and exacerbates the bank’s exposure to liquidity risk. Moreover, capital adequacy ratio has significant and positive association with bank liquidity, as a strong capital ratio helps to strengthen the liquidity control. However, return on assets has a negative significant impact on bank liquidity. For instance, if the bank holds more cash, it deprives itself from placing funds and earning returns, which causes its profitability to decline.

This paper gives further insights to better improve the liquidity risk management in a context of scarcity of Shariah-compliant instruments. Islamic bank needs to determine the PLS purpose and goals to be consistent with the “bank’s financing policy” and convince its depositors to use their deposits for medium and long-run investments.

Unlike previous empirical research, this investigation tries to better grasp the Islamic bank liquidity issue by focusing on the PLS impact on liquidity risk. It aims to fill in the gap in the empirical literature on this topic.