Risk spillovers and interconnectedness between systemically important institutions

被引:32
作者
Andries, Alin Marius [1 ,2 ]
Ongena, Steven [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Sprincean, Nicu [1 ]
Tunaru, Radu [6 ]
机构
[1] Alexandru Ioan Cuza Univ, 22 Carol I Blvd, Iasi 700505, Romania
[2] Romanian Acad, Inst Econ Forecasting, 22 Carol I Blvd, Iasi 700505, Romania
[3] Univ Zurich, Swiss Finance Inst, Plattenstr 14, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland
[4] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
[5] CEPR, Leuven, Belgium
[6] Univ Sussex, Sch Business, Sussex House, Brighton BN1 9RH, E Sussex, England
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
Systemic risk; Interconnectedness; Bank networks; Bayesian graphical VAR; Textual analysis; CAPITAL SHORTFALL; NETWORK; CONTAGION; MARKET; DEPENDENCE; QUANTILOGRAM; STOCK; CONNECTEDNESS; STABILITY; MODELS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jfs.2021.100963
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
In this paper, we gauge the degree of interconnectedness and quantify the linkages between global and other systemically important institutions, and the global financial system. We document that the two groups and the financial system become more interconnected during the global financial crisis when linkages across groups grow. In contrast, during tranquil times linkages within groups prevail. Global systemically important banks (GSIBs) contribute most to system-wide distress but are also most exposed. There are more links coming from GSIBs to other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) than the other way around, confirming the role of GSIBs as major risk transmitters in the financial system. The two groups and the global financial system tend to co vary for periods up to 60 days Prior to their official designation as G-SIBs or O-SIIs, the prevalent news sentiment about these institutions (we measure with a textual analysis) was negative. Importantly, the systemic importance and exposure of G-SIBs and O-SIIs is perceived differently by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) and the European Banking Authority (EBA).
引用
收藏
页数:26
相关论文
共 89 条
  • [1] Bootstrap tests for distributional treatment effects in instrumental variable models
    Abadie, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION, 2002, 97 (457) : 284 - 292
  • [2] Assessing stock market dependence and contagion
    Abbara, Omar
    Zevallos, Mauricio
    [J]. QUANTITATIVE FINANCE, 2014, 14 (09) : 1627 - 1641
  • [3] Heterogeneous market structure and systemic risk: Evidence from dual banking systems
    Abedifar, Pejman
    Giudici, Paolo
    Hashem, Shatha Qamhieh
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL STABILITY, 2017, 33 : 96 - 119
  • [4] Systemic Risk and Stability in Financial Networks
    Acemoglu, Daron
    Ozdaglar, Asuman
    Tahbaz-Salehi, Alireza
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2015, 105 (02) : 564 - 608
  • [5] The Network Origins of Aggregate Fluctuations
    Acemoglu, Daron
    Carvalho, Vasco M.
    Ozdaglar, Asuman
    Tahbaz-Salehi, Alireza
    [J]. ECONOMETRICA, 2012, 80 (05) : 1977 - 2016
  • [6] Capital Shortfall: A New Approach to Ranking and Regulating Systemic Risks
    Acharya, Viral
    Engle, Robert
    Richardson, Matthew
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2012, 102 (03) : 59 - 64
  • [7] Measuring Systemic Risk
    Acharya, Viral V.
    Pedersen, Lasse H.
    Philippon, Thomas
    Richardson, Matthew
    [J]. REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES, 2017, 30 (01) : 2 - 47
  • [8] Trading networks
    Adamic, Lada
    Brunetti, Celso
    Harris, Jeffrey H.
    Kirilenko, Andrei
    [J]. ECONOMETRICS JOURNAL, 2017, 20 (03) : S126 - S149
  • [9] CoVaR
    Adrian, Tobias
    Brunnermeier, Markus K.
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2016, 106 (07) : 1705 - 1741
  • [10] Network VAR models to measure financial contagion
    Ahelegbey, Daniel Felix
    Giudici, Paolo
    Hashem, Shatha Qamhieh
    [J]. NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE, 2021, 55