Browsing by Subject "bank closure"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-3 of 3
  • Mäkinen, Mikko; Solanko, Laura (2017)
    BOFIT Discussion Papers 16/2017
    Published in Russian Journal of Money and Finance, 77, 2, 2018, 3–21
    This study examines whether changes in CAMEL variables matter in explaining bank closure. Using a unique set of monthly bank-specific balance sheet data from Russia, we estimate determinants of bank license withdrawals during 2013m7-2017m7. We make two key findings. First, changes in CAMEL indicators are always significantly correlated with probability of bank closure, and the magnitude of parameter estimates decreases with the lag length. Second, while the one-month lagged levels of capital, earnings, and liquidity are significantly associated with the probability of bank closure in the subsequent month, the level of liquidity is the only significant indicator for longer lags. Our key contribution that changes in CAMEL variables matter more than levels is robust to various robustness checks.
  • Mäkinen, Mikko; Solanko, Laura (2018)
    Russian Journal of Money and Finance 2 ; 2018
    This study examines the role of levels and changes in bank balance sheet variables in explaining bank closure. Using a unique set of monthly bank-level panel data from Russia, we estimate determinants of bank license withdrawals during 2013M7-2017M7. We make two key findings. First, changes in CAMEL indicators are always significantly correlated with probability of bank closure, and the magnitude of parameter estimates decreases with the lag length. Second, while the one-month lagged levels of capital, earnings, and liquidity are significantly associated with the probability of bank closure in the subsequent month, the level of liquidity is the only significant indicator for longer lags. Our key contribution that changes in CAMEL variables matter more than levels is robust to various robustness checks.
  • Lucchetta, Marcella; Moretto, Michele; Parigi, Bruno M. (2018)
    Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 2/2018
    We show that the impact of government bailouts (liquidity injections) on a representative bank’s risk taking depends on the level of systematic risk of its loans portfolio. In a model where bank’s output follows a geometric Brownian motion and the government guarantees bank’s liabilities, we show first that more generous bailouts may or may not induce banks to take on more risk depending on the level of systematic risk; if systematic risk is high (low), a more generous bailout decreases (increases) bank’s risk taking. Second, the optimal liquidity policy itself depends on systematic risk. Third, the relationship between bailouts and bank’s risk taking is not monotonic. When systematic risk is low, the optimal liquidity policy is loose and more generous bailouts induce banks to take on more risk. If systematic risk is high and the optimal liquidity policy is tight, less generous bailouts induce banks to take on less risk. However, when high systematic risk makes a very tight liquidity policy optimal, a less generous bailout could increase bank’s risk taking. While in this model there is only one representative bank, in an economy with many banks, a higher level of systematic risk could also be a source of systemic risk if a tighter liquidity policy induces correlated risk taking choices by banks.