{"title":"银行间市场是否为系统性风险定价?","authors":"Michael Sigmund, Christoph Siebenbrunner","doi":"10.1016/j.jfs.2024.101223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The breakdown of the interbank market was a critical moment in the unfolding of the global financial crisis of 2007–2008. We argue that the adequate pricing of risks is critical for the functioning of a market of such vital importance as the interbank market. We use a unique panel data set that allows us to quantify counterparty risk and different types of systemic risks associated with interbank exposures. We use a simultaneous equation model for interbank lending and deposit rates to study whether counterparty risk and systemic risk are adequately priced. As expected, we find that riskier banks on average pay a higher deposit rate. However, on average, banks grant a discount in their lending rates to riskier banks. For systemic risk, we also find mixed results. The positive effect on the deposit rate declines, but the negative effect on the lending rate remains. We argue that the mixed results regarding the pricing of systemic risk might ex-post justify parts of the Basel III reform package that forces systemically important banks to hold higher capital buffers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48027,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Stability","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 101223"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do interbank markets price systemic risk?\",\"authors\":\"Michael Sigmund, Christoph Siebenbrunner\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jfs.2024.101223\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The breakdown of the interbank market was a critical moment in the unfolding of the global financial crisis of 2007–2008. We argue that the adequate pricing of risks is critical for the functioning of a market of such vital importance as the interbank market. We use a unique panel data set that allows us to quantify counterparty risk and different types of systemic risks associated with interbank exposures. We use a simultaneous equation model for interbank lending and deposit rates to study whether counterparty risk and systemic risk are adequately priced. As expected, we find that riskier banks on average pay a higher deposit rate. However, on average, banks grant a discount in their lending rates to riskier banks. For systemic risk, we also find mixed results. The positive effect on the deposit rate declines, but the negative effect on the lending rate remains. We argue that the mixed results regarding the pricing of systemic risk might ex-post justify parts of the Basel III reform package that forces systemically important banks to hold higher capital buffers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48027,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Financial Stability\",\"volume\":\"71 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Financial Stability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1572308924000081\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Stability","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1572308924000081","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
The breakdown of the interbank market was a critical moment in the unfolding of the global financial crisis of 2007–2008. We argue that the adequate pricing of risks is critical for the functioning of a market of such vital importance as the interbank market. We use a unique panel data set that allows us to quantify counterparty risk and different types of systemic risks associated with interbank exposures. We use a simultaneous equation model for interbank lending and deposit rates to study whether counterparty risk and systemic risk are adequately priced. As expected, we find that riskier banks on average pay a higher deposit rate. However, on average, banks grant a discount in their lending rates to riskier banks. For systemic risk, we also find mixed results. The positive effect on the deposit rate declines, but the negative effect on the lending rate remains. We argue that the mixed results regarding the pricing of systemic risk might ex-post justify parts of the Basel III reform package that forces systemically important banks to hold higher capital buffers.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Financial Stability provides an international forum for rigorous theoretical and empirical macro and micro economic and financial analysis of the causes, management, resolution and preventions of financial crises, including banking, securities market, payments and currency crises. The primary focus is on applied research that would be useful in affecting public policy with respect to financial stability. Thus, the Journal seeks to promote interaction among researchers, policy-makers and practitioners to identify potential risks to financial stability and develop means for preventing, mitigating or managing these risks both within and across countries.