scholarly journals Development of a methodology for assessing systemically important Ukrainian banks and a Z-score

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 230-242
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Hirna ◽  
Vira Druhova ◽  
Lidiia Dudynets ◽  
Olha Vernei ◽  
Dariusz Wawrzyniak

The indicator-based method recommended by the Basel Committee is one of the most common approaches to identifying systemically important banks. National authorities often establish their own methodology by adding modern tools that, in their opinion, adequately capture systemic risk in their domestic economy. The paper shows that the updated methodology for assessing systemically important Ukrainian banks can be verified on publicly available data. The analysis confirms that the updated version of the National Bank’s assessment methodology is in line with those recommended by international banking institutions, but does not fully capture the current systemic risk factors. Systematization of literary and statistical sources indicates that one of the main sources of systemic risk in Ukraine is the establishment of a state monopoly in the banking market. Thus, the assessment methodology should be supplemented by instruments to evaluate the performance of the banking business. The indicator-based method and the minus one bank Z-score approach were tested to identify Ukrainian systemically important banks from 2010 to 2017.The loss of the leading role of PrivatBank in ensuring banking stability after the transition to state ownership since 2016, as well as the equalization of the systemic risk contribution of banks with state, foreign and domestic capital, was discovered. The study empirically confirms that Z-index, which combines the positive characteristics of the static asset return ratio and bankruptcy probability, can be used to determine the methodology as an indicator of the performance of systemically important banks, primarily state-owned banks.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Brogi ◽  
Valentina Lagasio ◽  
Luca Riccetti

AbstractThe general consensus on the need to enhance the resilience of the financial system has led to the imposition of higher capital requirements for certain institutions, supposedly based on their contribution to systemic risk. Global Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs) are divided into buckets based on their required additional capital buffers ranging from 1% to 3.5%. We measure the marginal contribution to systemic risk of 26 G-SIBs using the Distressed Insurance Premium methodology proposed by Huang et al. (J Bank Financ 33:2036–2049, 2009) and examine ranking consistency with that using the SRISK of Acharya et al. (Am Econ Rev 102:59–64, 2012). We then compare the bucketing using the two academic approaches and supervisory buckets. Because it leads to capital surcharges, bucketing should be consistent, irrespective of methodology. Instead, discrepancies in the allocation between buckets emerge and this suggests the complementary use of other methodologies.


Author(s):  
Rodney Garratt ◽  
Lavan Mahadeva ◽  
Katsiaryna Svirydzenka

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-95
Author(s):  
Yu.S. Evlakhova ◽  
◽  
E.N. Alifanova ◽  
A.A. Tregubova ◽  
◽  
...  

This paper finds out the behavior patterns of the Russian banking sector and systemically important banks in response to changes in the population financial activity under the economic shocks. The results show that the Russian banking sector has a behavior pattern that includes the sequence of actions: the outflow of deposits — vulnerability to non-repayment of loans — deposit bubble — credit bubble. We find no consistent evidence that systemically important banks show the same sequence of actions during the crises. We also find that the banking sector behavior and systemically important banks’ behavior varied in 2008–2009, but became the same in the crisis of 2014–2015. The coincidence of behavior patterns of the banking sector and systemically important banks increases the systemic risk. Research on intragroup differences between systemically important banks will allow finding solutions to reduce the risk.


2019 ◽  
Vol 109 (9) ◽  
pp. 3125-3161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haelim Anderson ◽  
Mark Paddrik ◽  
Jessie Jiaxu Wang

The National Banking Acts (NBAs) of 1863–1864 established rules governing the amounts and locations of interbank deposits, thereby reshaping the bank networks. Using unique data on bank balance sheets and detailed interbank deposits in 1862 and 1867 in Pennsylvania, we study how the NBAs changed the network structure and quantify the effect on financial stability in an interbank network model. We find that the NBAs induced a concentration of interbank deposits at both the city and bank levels, creating systemically important banks. Although the concentration facilitated diversification, contagion would have become more likely when financial center banks faced large shocks. (JEL E44, G01, G21, G28, L14, N21)


Author(s):  
Claudia M. Buch ◽  
Gayle L. Delong

The financial crisis has renewed interest in the globalization of the banking industry, the patterns of entry into foreign markets, and the effects of complex banking organizations. There is a rich body of literature on international banks, which has recently been expanded by the improved theoretical modeling of the international banking firm and by focusing on implications for (systemic) risk. In this chapter, we focus on three main questions. First, what are the determinants of cross-border entry through acquisitions of commercial banks? Second, what are the effects of cross-border entry on complexity and the efficiency of banks? Third, what are the risk effects of international bank acquisitions, in particular with regard to systemic risk? We begin with a brief summary of the stylized facts, and we conclude with implications for researchers and policymakers.


2022 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 92
Author(s):  
Michael Galetakis ◽  
Vassilios Deligiorgis ◽  
Emmanuel Steiakakis ◽  
Stella Raka ◽  
Marwan Alheib

In this study we present a generic probabilistic risk assessment methodology to evaluate the risk associated with flooding process of a pit. We use the bow-tie analysis to analyze the critical events (we focus on slope failures) and the systemic risk assessment methodology to estimate the risk for the population, for the environment and for the infrastructure. Furthermore, we perform a spatial analysis of the risk by discretizing the affected area into squares, by estimating the risk in each one and finally by creating the risk map. The methodology is implemented by specialized software that has been created in a Matlab environment for the deduction of such risk assessments. The developed methodology was applied in the area of the pit lake Most in Czech Republic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document