当杠杆率与衍生品相遇:没有选择余地?*

Q1 Economics, Econometrics and Finance Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments Pub Date : 2021-09-29 DOI:10.1111/fmii.12154
Richard Haynes, Lihong McPhail
{"title":"当杠杆率与衍生品相遇:没有选择余地?*","authors":"Richard Haynes,&nbsp;Lihong McPhail","doi":"10.1111/fmii.12154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper examines the impact of Basel III leverage ratio on the competitive landscape of US derivatives markets. Because the leverage ratio focuses on notional amounts and does not fully recognize offsetting positions and risk-mitigating collateral, it is more likely the binding constraint for derivatives. The leverage ratio also put heterogeneous constraints on different types of institutions and activities. Using daily positions of clearing members and their customers on S&amp;P 500 E-mini futures options, we test the following four hypotheses when the public disclosure of the leverage ratio became mandatory in January 2015: (1) banks lose market share to nonbanks; (2) US banks lose market share to European banks; (3) banks' clearing activities shift away from customer accounts to house accounts; (4) low-delta options are affected most by the leverage ratio. All hypotheses are confirmed in the data. Short-dated US Treasury futures options, which receive zero exposure in the leverage ratio calculation, do not exhibit such behavior. Our evidence suggests that the leverage ratio requirement pushes derivatives activities toward less constrained institutions and market segments.</p>","PeriodicalId":39670,"journal":{"name":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","volume":"30 5","pages":"201-224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When leverage ratio meets derivatives: Running out of options?*\",\"authors\":\"Richard Haynes,&nbsp;Lihong McPhail\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/fmii.12154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper examines the impact of Basel III leverage ratio on the competitive landscape of US derivatives markets. Because the leverage ratio focuses on notional amounts and does not fully recognize offsetting positions and risk-mitigating collateral, it is more likely the binding constraint for derivatives. The leverage ratio also put heterogeneous constraints on different types of institutions and activities. Using daily positions of clearing members and their customers on S&amp;P 500 E-mini futures options, we test the following four hypotheses when the public disclosure of the leverage ratio became mandatory in January 2015: (1) banks lose market share to nonbanks; (2) US banks lose market share to European banks; (3) banks' clearing activities shift away from customer accounts to house accounts; (4) low-delta options are affected most by the leverage ratio. All hypotheses are confirmed in the data. Short-dated US Treasury futures options, which receive zero exposure in the leverage ratio calculation, do not exhibit such behavior. Our evidence suggests that the leverage ratio requirement pushes derivatives activities toward less constrained institutions and market segments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments\",\"volume\":\"30 5\",\"pages\":\"201-224\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fmii.12154\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Economics, Econometrics and Finance\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fmii.12154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文考察了巴塞尔协议III杠杆率对美国衍生品市场竞争格局的影响。由于杠杆率关注的是名义金额,并没有充分认识到抵消头寸和降低风险的抵押品,因此它更有可能成为衍生品的约束性约束。杠杆率对不同类型的机构和活动也产生了异质约束。利用结算会员及其客户对标普500 E-mini期货期权的每日持仓情况,我们在2015年1月强制公开披露杠杆率时检验了以下四个假设:(1)银行的市场份额被非银行机构所占据;(2)美国银行的市场份额被欧洲银行抢走;(3)银行清算业务由客户账户向内部账户转移;(4)低增量期权受杠杆率影响最大。所有的假设都在数据中得到证实。在杠杆率计算中敞口为零的短期美国国债期货期权没有表现出这种行为。我们的证据表明,杠杆率要求将衍生品活动推向约束较少的机构和细分市场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
When leverage ratio meets derivatives: Running out of options?*

This paper examines the impact of Basel III leverage ratio on the competitive landscape of US derivatives markets. Because the leverage ratio focuses on notional amounts and does not fully recognize offsetting positions and risk-mitigating collateral, it is more likely the binding constraint for derivatives. The leverage ratio also put heterogeneous constraints on different types of institutions and activities. Using daily positions of clearing members and their customers on S&P 500 E-mini futures options, we test the following four hypotheses when the public disclosure of the leverage ratio became mandatory in January 2015: (1) banks lose market share to nonbanks; (2) US banks lose market share to European banks; (3) banks' clearing activities shift away from customer accounts to house accounts; (4) low-delta options are affected most by the leverage ratio. All hypotheses are confirmed in the data. Short-dated US Treasury futures options, which receive zero exposure in the leverage ratio calculation, do not exhibit such behavior. Our evidence suggests that the leverage ratio requirement pushes derivatives activities toward less constrained institutions and market segments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments
Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (all)
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Financial Markets, Institutions and Instruments bridges the gap between the academic and professional finance communities. With contributions from leading academics, as well as practitioners from organizations such as the SEC and the Federal Reserve, the journal is equally relevant to both groups. Each issue is devoted to a single topic, which is examined in depth, and a special fifth issue is published annually highlighting the most significant developments in money and banking, derivative securities, corporate finance, and fixed-income securities.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Do banks adjust their capital when they face liquidity shortages? Evidence from U.S. commercial banks Piercing through the haze: Did PPP increase versus decrease bank efficiency? Issue Information
×
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