机构投资者的角色:来自国外144a规则债券市场的证据

IF 0.9 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
A. Huang, Madhu Kalimipalli, Subhankar Nayak, Latha Ramchand
{"title":"机构投资者的角色:来自国外144a规则债券市场的证据","authors":"A. Huang, Madhu Kalimipalli, Subhankar Nayak, Latha Ramchand","doi":"10.1142/s2010139221500117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How did the crisis impact financial intermediation? We address this question by studying a unique market segment, viz. foreign private debt issued in the U.S., which grew in size despite the financial crisis. Specifically, foreign private (or Rule 144A) debt issued in the U.S. increased more than five-fold as between pre-crisis (1999-06) and crisis (2007-09) periods compared to public (or Yankee) debt. At the same time, domestic private (144A) debt issuances by U.S. firms remained relatively flat. Using an exhaustive sample of foreign bond issuances in the U.S. from over 65 countries between 1990 and 2013, we examine the effects of the financial crisis on three key corporate decisions viz., debt choice, pricing, and market timing comparing public (Yankee) and private (Rule 144A) debt issues for all foreign firms. We find that Qualified Institutional Buyers (QIBs), the only investors in unregistered 144A bonds, were preferentially funding foreign firms in the 144A market and at better spreads, despite the firms’ high idiosyncratic risks and leverage, and excessive underlying local market volatility. However, we see no such preference in 144A lending to domestic U.S. borrowers. Overall, our findings are consistent with the flight of intermediation in that while many good quality foreign firms began issuing in U.S. due to local capital constraints, QIBs were able to better allocate their scarce capital in favor of quality private debt borrowers.","PeriodicalId":45339,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Finance","volume":"17 1","pages":"2150011"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Role of Institutional Investors: Evidence from the Foreign Rule-144A Debt Market\",\"authors\":\"A. Huang, Madhu Kalimipalli, Subhankar Nayak, Latha Ramchand\",\"doi\":\"10.1142/s2010139221500117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How did the crisis impact financial intermediation? We address this question by studying a unique market segment, viz. foreign private debt issued in the U.S., which grew in size despite the financial crisis. Specifically, foreign private (or Rule 144A) debt issued in the U.S. increased more than five-fold as between pre-crisis (1999-06) and crisis (2007-09) periods compared to public (or Yankee) debt. At the same time, domestic private (144A) debt issuances by U.S. firms remained relatively flat. Using an exhaustive sample of foreign bond issuances in the U.S. from over 65 countries between 1990 and 2013, we examine the effects of the financial crisis on three key corporate decisions viz., debt choice, pricing, and market timing comparing public (Yankee) and private (Rule 144A) debt issues for all foreign firms. We find that Qualified Institutional Buyers (QIBs), the only investors in unregistered 144A bonds, were preferentially funding foreign firms in the 144A market and at better spreads, despite the firms’ high idiosyncratic risks and leverage, and excessive underlying local market volatility. However, we see no such preference in 144A lending to domestic U.S. borrowers. Overall, our findings are consistent with the flight of intermediation in that while many good quality foreign firms began issuing in U.S. due to local capital constraints, QIBs were able to better allocate their scarce capital in favor of quality private debt borrowers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Finance\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"2150011\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1142/s2010139221500117\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Finance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/s2010139221500117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

危机是如何影响金融中介的?我们通过研究一个独特的细分市场来解决这个问题,即在美国发行的外国私人债务,尽管金融危机,其规模仍在增长。具体来说,在美国发行的外国私人(或144A规则)债务在危机前(1999-06)和危机(2007-09)期间比公共(或Yankee)债务增加了五倍多。与此同时,美国公司的国内私人(144A)债券发行量保持相对平稳。利用1990年至2013年期间来自65个国家在美国发行的外国债券的详尽样本,我们研究了金融危机对三个关键公司决策的影响,即债务选择、定价和市场时机,比较所有外国公司的公共(Yankee)和私人(Rule 144A)债务发行。我们发现,合格机构买家(qib)是未注册的144A债券的唯一投资者,尽管这些公司具有较高的特殊风险和杠杆率,以及过度的潜在本地市场波动,但它们仍优先为144A市场的外国公司提供资金,并且息差更好。然而,我们在向美国国内借款人发放144A贷款时没有看到这种偏好。总体而言,我们的研究结果与中介机构的外逃是一致的,因为尽管许多优质的外国公司由于当地资本限制而开始在美国发行债券,但qib能够更好地将其稀缺的资本分配给优质的私人债务借款人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Role of Institutional Investors: Evidence from the Foreign Rule-144A Debt Market
How did the crisis impact financial intermediation? We address this question by studying a unique market segment, viz. foreign private debt issued in the U.S., which grew in size despite the financial crisis. Specifically, foreign private (or Rule 144A) debt issued in the U.S. increased more than five-fold as between pre-crisis (1999-06) and crisis (2007-09) periods compared to public (or Yankee) debt. At the same time, domestic private (144A) debt issuances by U.S. firms remained relatively flat. Using an exhaustive sample of foreign bond issuances in the U.S. from over 65 countries between 1990 and 2013, we examine the effects of the financial crisis on three key corporate decisions viz., debt choice, pricing, and market timing comparing public (Yankee) and private (Rule 144A) debt issues for all foreign firms. We find that Qualified Institutional Buyers (QIBs), the only investors in unregistered 144A bonds, were preferentially funding foreign firms in the 144A market and at better spreads, despite the firms’ high idiosyncratic risks and leverage, and excessive underlying local market volatility. However, we see no such preference in 144A lending to domestic U.S. borrowers. Overall, our findings are consistent with the flight of intermediation in that while many good quality foreign firms began issuing in U.S. due to local capital constraints, QIBs were able to better allocate their scarce capital in favor of quality private debt borrowers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quarterly Journal of Finance
Quarterly Journal of Finance BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Quarterly Journal of Finance publishes high-quality papers in all areas of finance, including corporate finance, asset pricing, financial econometrics, international finance, macro-finance, behavioral finance, banking and financial intermediation, capital markets, risk management and insurance, derivatives, quantitative finance, corporate governance and compensation, investments and entrepreneurial finance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信