(Un)Conventional Monetary Policy and Bank Risk-Taking


Book Description

This paper investigates the effect of monetary policy - especially unconventional monetary policy - on bank risk-taking behavior in Europe over the period 2000-2015. Using a dynamic panel model with a threshold effect, we estimate this effect on two measures of bank risk: the Distance to Default, which reflects the market perception of risk, and the asymmetric Z-score, which corresponds to an accounting-based measure of the risk. We find that loosening monetary policy via low interest rates and increasing central banks' liquidity has a harmful effect on banks' risk, confirming the existence of the risk-taking channel. Moreover, we show that this relationship is nonlinear, i.e., with the sustainable implementation of unconventional monetary policies, the effects are stronger below a certain threshold.




Bank Leverage and Monetary Policy's Risk-Taking Channel


Book Description

We present evidence of a risk-taking channel of monetary policy for the U.S. banking system. We use confidential data on the internal ratings of U.S. banks on loans to businesses over the period 1997 to 2011 from the Federal Reserve’s survey of terms of business lending. We find that ex-ante risk taking by banks (as measured by the risk rating of the bank’s loan portfolio) is negatively associated with increases in short-term policy interest rates. This relationship is less pronounced for banks with relatively low capital or during periods when banks’ capital erodes, such as episodes of financial and economic distress. These results contribute to the ongoing debate on the role of monetary policy in financial stability and suggest that monetary policy has a bearing on the riskiness of banks and financial stability more generally.




Unconventional Monetary Policy and Bank Risk Taking


Book Description

In this paper we use corporate syndicated loan data to study the presence of a bank risk-taking channel of unconventional monetary policy in the United States over the period 2008-2015. To account for both actual policy decisions and anticipation effects, we measure the stance of monetary policy by estimating a financial VAR model. We find that accommodative monetary conditions are associated with overall lower loan spreads. Controlling for borrower creditworthiness, we show that the spread reduction is lower for riskier firms, indicating that risk is appropriately priced during the period of unconventional monetary policy. Banks with low non-performing loan ratios and banks characterized by high revenue diversification offer larger loan spread discounts compared to banks with a large amount of non-performing loans and banks with less income diversification. We also find that banks with low capital ratios, less profitable banks and smaller banks more aggressively reduce the corporate loan spreads following an expansionary monetary policy shock, but only for the safest firms. Our findings indicate that unconventional monetary policy actions of the Federal Reserve are not associated with excessive risk taking by banks in the syndicated loan market.




The Effects of Unconventional Monetary Policies on Bank Soundness


Book Description

Unconventional monetary policy is often assumed to benefit banks. However, we find little supporting evidence. Rather, we find some evidence for heightened medium-term risks. First, in an event study using a novel instrument for monetary policy surprises, we do not detect clear effects of monetary easing on bank stock valuation but find a deterioration of medium-term bank credit risk in the United States, the euro area, and the United Kingdom. Second, in panel regressions using U.S. banks’ balance sheet information, we show that bank profitability and risk taking are ambiguously affected, while balance sheet repair is delayed.







Should Unconventional Monetary Policies Become Conventional?


Book Description

The large recession that followed the Global Financial Crisis of 2008-09 triggered unprecedented monetary policy easing around the world. Most central banks in advanced economies deployed new instruments to affect credit conditions and to provide liquidity at a large scale after shortterm policy rates reached their effective lower bound. In this paper, we study if this new set of tools, commonly labeled as unconventional monetary policies (UMP), should still be used when economic conditions and interest rates normalize. In particular, we study the optimality of asset purchase programs by using an estimated non-linear DSGE model with a banking sector and long-term private and public debt for the United States. We find that the benefits of using such UMP in normal times are substantial, equivalent to 1.45 percent of consumption. However, the benefits from using UMP are shock-dependent and mostly arise when the economy is hit by financial shocks. When more traditional business cycle shocks (such as supply and demand shocks) hit the economy, the benefits of using UMP are negligible or zero.




What is the Impact of a Major Unconventional Monetary Policy Intervention?


Book Description

WWe analyse how unconventional monetary policy affects bank lending standards during crises. We use a major central bank intervention that boosted the capital of banks, “whatever it takes” speech of the European Central Bank President, as a natural experiment. We compare changes in lending standards of euro area versus other banks in a third country, Mexico. The intervention reversed prior risk-taking--in volume, price, and risk ratings--of subsidiaries of euro area banks. Our findings show that large and credible unconventional monetary policies can reduce risk-taking domestically and abroad during crises, at least temporarily, adding a new dimension to the bank capital channel.




Bank Profitability and Risk-Taking


Book Description

Traditional theory suggests that more profitable banks should have lower risk-taking incentives. Then why did many profitable banks choose to invest in untested financial instruments before the crisis, realizing significant losses? We attempt to reconcile theory and evidence. In our setup, banks are endowed with a fixed core business. They take risk by levering up to engage in risky ‘side activities’(such as market-based investments) alongside the core business. A more profitable core business allows a bank to borrow more and take side risks on a larger scale, offsetting lower incentives to take risk of given size. Consequently, more profitable banks may have higher risk-taking incentives. The framework is consistent with cross-sectional patterns of bank risk-taking in the run up to the recent financial crisis.




Monetary Policy, Leverage, and Bank Risk Taking


Book Description

We provide a theoretical foundation for the claim that prolonged periods of easy monetary conditions increase bank risk taking. The net effect of a monetary policy change on bank monitoring (an inverse measure of risk taking) depends on the balance of three forces: interest rate pass-through, risk shifting, and leverage. When banks can adjust their capital structures, a monetary easing leads to greater leverage and lower monitoring. However, if a bank's capital structure is fixed, the balance depends on the degree of bank capitalization: when facing a policy rate cut, well capitalized banks decrease monitoring, while highly levered banks increase it. Further, the balance of these effects depends on the structure and contestability of the banking industry, and is therefore likely to vary across countries and over time.




Does Monetary Policy Affect Bank Risk-taking?


Book Description

This paper investigates the relationship between short-term interest rates and bank risk. Using a unique database that includes quarterly balance sheet information for listed banks operating in the European Union and the United States in the last decade, we find evidence that unusually low interest rates over an extended period of time contributed to an increase in banks' risk. This result holds for a wide range of measures of risk, as well as macroeconomic and institutional controls.