Factors related to the failure of FDIC-insured US banks

IF 2 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance Pub Date : 2021-08-20 DOI:10.1108/jfrc-08-2020-0075
Mario Jordi Maura-Pérez, Herminio Romero-Perez
{"title":"Factors related to the failure of FDIC-insured US banks","authors":"Mario Jordi Maura-Pérez, Herminio Romero-Perez","doi":"10.1108/jfrc-08-2020-0075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to analyze the factors related to the failure of 535 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)-Insured United States banks in conjunction with the 2008 financial crisis.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe research consists of an analysis of the following three five-year partitions: pre-crisis (2002–2006), crisis (2007–2011) and post-crisis (2012–2016). The main hypothesis is that the factors explaining bank failures vary by period. Using logistic regression analysis, the authors identify the desirable models by period based on three model selection strategies.\n\n\nFindings\nLiquidity and non-risk-based capital ratios are important explanatory factors in all three periods. As the authors can see from the results, when comparing the full period (2002–2016) and the three five-year period partitions (2002–2006, 2007–2011 and 2012–2016), the ratios change from period to period, but they measure the same financial areas of concern in different contexts as follows: liquidity, leverage/risk exposure and capital adequacy. Risk-based capital ratios are not effective predictors of bank failures.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nRecent academic studies have analyzed bank failures during periods that cover the years before, during and after the crisis, but most of these studies discuss bank failures in the forecasting context only. This study includes an analysis of failure determinants during pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis subperiods based on the FDIC monitoring system of bank failures and identifies what ratios are more relevant during each period and how they change from period to period.\n","PeriodicalId":44814,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfrc-08-2020-0075","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to analyze the factors related to the failure of 535 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)-Insured United States banks in conjunction with the 2008 financial crisis. Design/methodology/approach The research consists of an analysis of the following three five-year partitions: pre-crisis (2002–2006), crisis (2007–2011) and post-crisis (2012–2016). The main hypothesis is that the factors explaining bank failures vary by period. Using logistic regression analysis, the authors identify the desirable models by period based on three model selection strategies. Findings Liquidity and non-risk-based capital ratios are important explanatory factors in all three periods. As the authors can see from the results, when comparing the full period (2002–2016) and the three five-year period partitions (2002–2006, 2007–2011 and 2012–2016), the ratios change from period to period, but they measure the same financial areas of concern in different contexts as follows: liquidity, leverage/risk exposure and capital adequacy. Risk-based capital ratios are not effective predictors of bank failures. Originality/value Recent academic studies have analyzed bank failures during periods that cover the years before, during and after the crisis, but most of these studies discuss bank failures in the forecasting context only. This study includes an analysis of failure determinants during pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis subperiods based on the FDIC monitoring system of bank failures and identifies what ratios are more relevant during each period and how they change from period to period.
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
FDIC保险美国银行倒闭的相关因素
目的本研究旨在分析535家联邦存款保险公司(FDIC)保险的美国银行在2008年金融危机中倒闭的相关因素。设计/方法/方法该研究包括对以下三个五年期的分析:危机前(2002-2006)、危机后(2007-2011)和危机后(2012-2016)。主要假设是,解释银行倒闭的因素因时期而异。利用逻辑回归分析,作者根据三种模型选择策略,按时期确定了理想的模型。发现流动性和非风险资本比率是这三个时期的重要解释因素。正如作者从结果中看到的那样,当比较整个时期(2002-2016)和三个五年期划分(2002-2006、2007-2011和2012-2016)时,比率会随着时期的变化而变化,但它们在不同的背景下衡量了相同的金融领域:流动性、杠杆/风险敞口和资本充足率。基于风险的资本比率不是银行倒闭的有效预测因素。原创性/价值最近的学术研究分析了危机前、危机中和危机后几年的银行倒闭,但这些研究大多只在预测的背景下讨论银行倒闭。这项研究包括基于FDIC银行倒闭监测系统对危机前、危机和危机后子时期的倒闭决定因素的分析,并确定了在每个时期哪些比率更相关,以及它们如何在不同时期变化。
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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1992, the Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance has provided an authoritative and scholarly platform for international research in financial regulation and compliance. The journal is at the intersection between academic research and the practice of financial regulation, with distinguished past authors including senior regulators, central bankers and even a Prime Minister. Financial crises, predatory practices, internationalization and integration, the increased use of technology and financial innovation are just some of the changes and issues that contemporary financial regulators are grappling with. These challenges and changes hold profound implications for regulation and compliance, ranging from macro-prudential to consumer protection policies. The journal seeks to illuminate these issues, is pluralistic in approach and invites scholarly papers using any appropriate methodology. Accordingly, the journal welcomes submissions from finance, law, economics and interdisciplinary perspectives. A broad spectrum of research styles, sources of information and topics (e.g. banking laws and regulations, stock market and cross border regulation, risk assessment and management, training and competence, competition law, case law, compliance and regulatory updates and guidelines) are appropriate. All submissions are double-blind refereed and judged on academic rigour, originality, quality of exposition and relevance to policy and practice. Once accepted, individual articles are typeset, proofed and published online as the Version of Record within an average of 32 days, so that articles can be downloaded and cited earlier.
期刊最新文献
CBDCs, regulated stablecoins and tokenized traditional assets under the Basel Committee rules on cryptoassets All are interesting to invest, I fear of missing out (FOMO): a comparative study among self-employed and salaried investors A law and economic analysis of trading through dark pools Financial liberalisation and illicit financial outflows in African countries: does institutional quality and macroeconomic stability matter? Crossing the lines a human approach to improving the effectiveness of the three lines model in practice
×
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