FED Paper Suggests Regulating Liquidity Risk at Macro-Prudential Level
FED published a paper that examines whether banks strategically incorporate their competitors’ liquidity mismatch policies when determining their own and the impact of these collective decisions on financial stability. Using a novel identification strategy that exploits the presence of partially overlapping peer groups, the author shows that liquidity transformation activity of banks is driven by that of the peers. These correlated decisions are concentrated on the asset side of riskier banks and are asymmetric, with mimicking occurring only when competitors take more risk. Accordingly, this strategic behavior increases default risk of banks, along with the overall systemic risk, highlighting the importance of regulating liquidity risk from a macro-prudential perspective.
This paper examines the extent to which banks’ liquidity transformation activities are affected by the choices of their competitors and the impact of these collective risk-taking decisions on financial stability. Using a sample of 1,584 commercial banks operating in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries from 1999 to 2014 and the Berger and Bouwman (2009) liquidity creation measure to capture banks’ liquidity transformation activity, the author shows that financial intermediaries follow the liquidity mismatch policies of their competitors when determining their own. This strategic behavior is driven by liquidity created on the asset side, of which lending is a key component, and is concentrated in ex ante riskier banks.
With respect to the consequences of such strategic behavior for the financial system, the paper notes that the response of individual banks to the liquidity mismatch choices of competitors is asymmetric, with individual banks mimicking their peers only when competitors increase liquidity transformation risk. The author also shows that peer effects in financial institutions’ liquidity mismatch policies increase both individual banks’ default risk and overall systemic risk. This effect is both statistically and economically significant, highlighting the importance of explicitly regulating systemic liquidity risk from a macro-prudential perspective. While the Basel III liquidity requirements, combined with improved supervision, should help to strengthen individual banks’ funding structure and thus enhance banking sector stability, these liquidity standards are fundamentally micro-prudential in nature.
Despite the proposals for macro-prudential liquidity regulation such as time-varying liquidity coverage ratio and net stable funding ratio, or a macro-prudential liquidity buffer where each bank would be required to hold assets that are systemically liquid, policymakers and regulators have yet to establish a concise macro-prudential framework that mitigates the possibility of a simultaneous liquidity need by financial institutions. Since information spillovers are a defining characteristic of panics due to financial agents’ imperfect knowledge regarding common exposures and given that these information spillovers between banks do occur, a static and time-invariant micro-prudential liquidity requirement that mainly depends on individual banks’ idiosyncratic risk may not be suitable to prevent a systemic liquidity crisis.
Related Links
Keywords: Europe, Americas, US, Banking, Liquidity Mismatch, Systemic Risk, Macro-Prudential Framework, Basel III, Liquidity Transformation Risk, Research, FED
Featured Experts
María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer
Pierre-Etienne Chabanel
Brings expertise in technology and software solutions around banking regulation, whether deployed on-premises or in the cloud.
Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Previous Article
CMF Proposes Standard on Information Security and Cyber SecurityRelated Articles
FSB Sets Out Effective Practices for Cyber Incident Recovery
FSB finalized the toolkit of effective practices to assist financial institutions in their cyber incident response and recovery activities.
HKMA Urges Early Action for Adherence to IBOR Fallbacks Protocol
HKMA urged authorized institutions to take early action to adhere to the IBOR Fallbacks Protocol, which ISDA is expected to publish soon.
FSB Sets Out Roadmap for Transition to Alternative Reference Rates
FSB published a global transition roadmap for London Inter-bank Offered Rate (LIBOR).
HM Treasury Publishes Response to Proposal on BRRD2 Transposition
HM Treasury published a document that summarizes the responses received from a consultation on the approach of UK to transposition of the revised Bank Resolution and Recovery Directive (BRRD2).
HM Treasury Publishes Response to Proposal on CRD5 Transposition
HM Treasury published the government response to the feedback received on the consultation for updating the prudential regime of UK before the end of the Brexit transition period.
BoE Publishes Reporting Schedule for Statistical Returns
In a recent statistical notice, BoE announced publication of the reporting schedule for statistical returns for 2021.
EC Welcomes Declaration by Member States on EU Cloud Federation
EC welcomed the joint declaration by 25 EU member states on building the next generation of cloud in Europe.
PRA Updates Supervisory Statement on Counterparty Credit Risk
PRA published the final policy statement PS22/20, which contains the updated supervisory statement SS12/13 on counterparty credit risk.
FSB Publishes Update on Work to Address Market Fragmentation
FSB published an update on its work to address market fragmentation. FSB is working in this area in collaboration with the other standard-setting bodies.
EBA Proposes to Revise Guidelines on Incident Reporting Under PSD2
EBA proposed revisions to the guidelines on major incident reporting under the second Payment Service Directive (PSD2).
