Impact of specific liquidity shocks on the bank's solvency

Julien Dhima, Catherine Bruneau
{"title":"Impact of specific liquidity shocks on the bank's solvency","authors":"Julien Dhima, Catherine Bruneau","doi":"10.1108/jrf-05-2023-0124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis study aims to demonstrate and measure the impact of liquidity shocks on a bank’s solvency, especially when the bank does not hold sufficient liquid assets.Design/methodology/approachThe proposed model is an extension of Merton’s (1974) model. It assesses the bank’s probability of default over one or two (short) periods relative to liquidity shocks. The shock scenarios are materialised by different net demands for the withdrawal of funds (NDWF) and may lead the bank to sell illiquid assets at a depreciated value. We consider the possibility of second-round effects at the beginning of the second period by introducing the probability of their occurrence. This probability depends on the proportion of illiquid assets put up for sale following the initial shock in different dependency scenarios.FindingsWe observe a positive relationship between the initial NDWF and the bank’s probability of default (particularly over the second period, which is conditional on the second-round effects). However, this relationship is not linear, and a significant proportion of liquid assets makes it possible to attenuate or even eliminate the effects of shock scenarios on bank solvency.Practical implicationsThe proposed model enables banks to determine the necessary level of liquid assets, allowing them to resist (i.e. remain solvent) different liquidity shock scenarios for both periods (including eventual second-round effects) under the assumptions considered. Therefore, it can contribute to complementing or improving current internal liquidity adequacy assessment processes (ILAAPs).Originality/valueThe proposed microprudential approach consists of measuring the impact of liquidity risk on a bank’s solvency, complementing the current prudential framework in which these two topics are treated separately. It also complements the existing literature, in which the impact of liquidity risk on solvency risk has not been sufficiently studied. Finally, our model allows banks to manage liquidity using a solvency approach.","PeriodicalId":22869,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Risk Finance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Risk Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jrf-05-2023-0124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThis study aims to demonstrate and measure the impact of liquidity shocks on a bank’s solvency, especially when the bank does not hold sufficient liquid assets.Design/methodology/approachThe proposed model is an extension of Merton’s (1974) model. It assesses the bank’s probability of default over one or two (short) periods relative to liquidity shocks. The shock scenarios are materialised by different net demands for the withdrawal of funds (NDWF) and may lead the bank to sell illiquid assets at a depreciated value. We consider the possibility of second-round effects at the beginning of the second period by introducing the probability of their occurrence. This probability depends on the proportion of illiquid assets put up for sale following the initial shock in different dependency scenarios.FindingsWe observe a positive relationship between the initial NDWF and the bank’s probability of default (particularly over the second period, which is conditional on the second-round effects). However, this relationship is not linear, and a significant proportion of liquid assets makes it possible to attenuate or even eliminate the effects of shock scenarios on bank solvency.Practical implicationsThe proposed model enables banks to determine the necessary level of liquid assets, allowing them to resist (i.e. remain solvent) different liquidity shock scenarios for both periods (including eventual second-round effects) under the assumptions considered. Therefore, it can contribute to complementing or improving current internal liquidity adequacy assessment processes (ILAAPs).Originality/valueThe proposed microprudential approach consists of measuring the impact of liquidity risk on a bank’s solvency, complementing the current prudential framework in which these two topics are treated separately. It also complements the existing literature, in which the impact of liquidity risk on solvency risk has not been sufficiently studied. Finally, our model allows banks to manage liquidity using a solvency approach.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
特定流动性冲击对银行偿付能力的影响
本研究旨在证明和衡量流动性冲击对银行偿付能力的影响,尤其是当银行没有持有足够的流动性资产时。它评估了银行在一个或两个(短)时期内相对于流动性冲击的违约概率。冲击情景通过不同的资金提取净需求(NDWF)来实现,并可能导致银行以贬值的价格出售非流动资产。我们通过引入第二轮效应发生的概率来考虑第二轮效应发生的可能性。我们观察到初始 NDWF 与银行违约概率之间存在正相关关系(尤其是在第二阶段,这是以第二轮效应为条件的)。然而,这种关系并不是线性的,流动性资产所占的比例越大,就越有可能减轻甚至消除冲击情景对银行偿付能力的影响。因此,它有助于补充或改进当前的内部流动性充足性评估流程(ILAAPs)。原创性/价值所提出的微观审慎方法包括衡量流动性风险对银行偿付能力的影响,补充了当前分别处理这两个主题的审慎框架。该方法也是对现有文献的补充,在现有文献中,流动性风险对偿付能力风险的影响尚未得到充分研究。最后,我们的模型允许银行使用偿付能力方法管理流动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Why do firms list their shares in the US? The role of political uncertainty How do green bonds promote common prosperity? Evidence from Chinese prefecture-level cities Geopolitical risk and banking performance: evidence from emerging economies Temporary employment and financial distress in times of crisis Is tax avoidance one of the purposes of financial data manipulation? The case of Romania
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1