Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
MACROECONOMIC
Risk Centric Macroeconomic
There are four monetary policy variables: the policy interest rate, the interest on the
deposit facility, the shadow interest rate, which is a good proxy for unconventional
monetary policy (UMP), and the logarithm of central banks’ total assets. More precisely,
this paper aim to investigate whether monetary authorities’ instruments have a non-
linear effect on bank risk-taking behavior.
The model provides interesting results when taking into account threshold effects. We
find a nonlinear effect for both measures. The decline in central bank rates, or the rise in
the monetary base, reflect riskier banks’ behavior. This result is in line with the literature
and suggests that the bank risk-taking channel was at play before the emer-gence of the
GFC. More important, our second contribution indicates
Conclusion (2)
when interest rate indicators are low and below the threshold, the negative
relationship between bank risk measures and monetary policy is stronger.
Accounting for the central banks’ balance sheet policy indicates that
additional liquidity encourages banks to take riskier positions. Their behavior
becomes even riskier after the implementation of UMP. These findings are
confirmed when (1) using the loans-to-assets ratio as a measure of risk, (2)
using the traditional Z-score and (3) using the shadow short rate for each
country as a monetary policy variable.
These results indicate that monetary policy does have an impact on banks’
risk-taking and that monetary authorities should be concerned about this.
They cannot set monetary conditions only on the basis of the final
objectives of monetary policy. They must also take into account their effect
on financial stability. A too accommodating monetary policy can contribute to
the accumulation of financial imbalances and difficulties in banking industry.
Prudential regulation, while reducing these risks, is not sufficient when
monetary policy is too accommodating.
Journal 2
(Monetary policy and systemic risk-taking in the euro area
banking sector)
Introduction
THEORIES
Economic Methodology Data Results
Results
This
This study
study uses
uses aa large
large
macro
macro financial
financial database
database This
This section
section presents
presents thethe
of
of 519
519 times
times series
series results
results of of CMP
CMP shocks
shocks
including
including systemic
systemic risk risk during
during 2002Q4-2017Q2,
2002Q4-2017Q2,
indicators
indicators of of thethe 30 30 and
and of of UMP
UMP and and
largest
largest euro
euro area
area “signaling
“signaling shocks”
shocks” during
during
banking
banking groups.
groups. These
These 2008Q4-2017Q2
2008Q4-2017Q2
banking
banking groups
groups come come ItIt seems
seems with
with Jimenez
Jimenez et et
from
from countries
countries that that al
al (2014)
(2014) suggestion
suggestion that that
behaved
behaved differently
differently lower
lower interest
interest rates
rates
during
during the the European
European reduce
reduce banks’
banks’ total
total credit
credit
sovereign
sovereign debt debt crisis
crisis risk
risksince
since the
the volume
volume of of
with
with respect
respect toto the
the bank
bank outstanding
outstanding loans loans isis
sovereign
sovereign nexus
nexus larger
larger than
than the
the volume
volume of of
Data
Data are
are form
form thethe ECB,
ECB, new
new loans
loans
Bloomberg,
Bloomberg, BIS, BIS, and and there
there isis evidence
evidence that that
Eurostat
Eurostat systemic
systemic riskrisk inin the
the form
form
of
of vulner-abilities
vulner-abilities
increases
increases in in the
the banking
banking
industry
industry via via contagion
contagion
and
and intercon-nectedness
intercon-nectedness
Conclusi
on
The abundant empirical evidence available on the significance of the risk-taking channel
of monetary policy is not enough to be concerned about the possibility of a monetary
policy trade-off between price stability and financial stability. Systemic risk in the banking
sector, while operating through the traditional risk-taking channel of monetary policy, i.e.
via banks’ balance sheets, profitability and leverage, in order to be properly measured,
also requires the inclusion of contagion, interconnectedness, lending standards, time-
varying correlations and feedback effects between asset prices and banks’ balance
sheets. The several dimensions of systemic risk must be taken into account to be able to
draw robust policy implications.
The results also highlight the importance of extending the study of systemic risk-taking to
non-bank financial intermediaries holding long-term liabilities and short-term assets, such
as pension funds, and to insurance companies and investment funds as well.
The main policy implication of this research is that a persistently accommodative
monetary policy may drive a monetary authority with a price stability mandate to
consider a possible trade-off with financial stability. Several options are possible, although
discussing them goes beyond the scope of this paper. However, without changing existing
monetary policy frameworks to accommodate the possible trade-off, the results do
suggest, at a minimum, that the coordination between monetary and macro-prudential
policies requires serious consideration.
SYSTEMIC FINANCIAL RISK AND MACROECONOMIC 3
ACTIVITY IN CHINA
Researchers have constructed various risk indexes vis-à-vis
a wide range of systemic risks since the outbreak of the
global financial crisis in 2008. Nevertheless, most indexes
target a certain aspect of systemic risk, and are thus
incapable of measuring innately complex systemic risk in a
comprehensive way. In addition, all existing indexes of
systemic risk focus exclusively on the financial market.
Consequently, they overlook its connection with the real
economy .
In order to fill in the gap, we have synthesized a number of
financial risk measures to construct a comprehensive index
of the financial systemic risk of China by using the Principal
Components Quantile Regression (PCQR). Our results
show that this index is able to measure multi-dimension
financial risk and predict its impact on the real economy of
China more accurately than most other existing risk indexes
such as term spreads.
Method
The market excess return series and exchange rate series have been
tested for stationarity using the ADF test. The correlation between the
excess market return series and the exchange rate series is calculated
to be 0.125 which is a reasonable explanation to justify the use of the
residuals of the regression between these two variables in order to
ensure orthogonality. The parameters, in equation (4) are estimated
using OLS.
The Hausman test between random and fixed effects suggested that a
random effects model would fit the data better. However, according to
Hsiao and Pesaran (2004), “Conventional models do not allow the
interaction of the individual specific and/or time-varying differences in the
included explanatory variables.” This was the rationale behind using
Random Coefficient models for estimation with the kind of panel data
we have. Aquino (2005) uses the Generalized Least Squares Seemingly
Unrelated Regression estimation technique to simultaneously estimate
the betas and pricing parameters.
Main findings remain invariant post such robustness test. Most of the
industry portfolios except for few industries such as ‘Electricity’,
‘Construction and Real Estate’ and ‘Financial Services’, we do not
observe non-linearity.
conclusion
• The impact of foreign exchange fluctuations on stock returns is
increasingly becoming a prominent issue to investors, financiers and
policymakers
• Empirical evidence suggests that investors are expectant of a risk
premium on their investment owing to the increased risk exposure
caused by exchange rate fluctuations, especially since the last few
years beginning from the crisis period. This implies inadequate
hedging by firms for the exchange rate risk and in the larger
macroeconomic sense, it displays market inefficiencies in the stock
market and/or foreign exchange market.
• The study has qualitatively inferred from the results obtained, that
Indian investors now require compensation for bearing exchange
rate risk. However, the quantitative aspects such as the difference
between the risk premiums demanded by investors in the various
time periods are beyond the scope of the present paper and are left
for future research.
Forecasting exchange rate value at risk using deep 6
belief network ensemble based approach
by kaijian He, lei ji, Geoffrey k.f.tso, bangzhu zhu, and yingchao zou
The administrative and support service activities sector is, on average, the
largest risk contributor, while the construction sector exhibits the highest volatility
in systemic risk contribution. Since consumers are less able to postpone the
consumption of goods from the wholesale and retail sector, this sector is (as
expected) the least systemic risk-contributing sector, on average.
The results suggest that the distress of a firm in the administrative and support
service or construction sectors results in higher average losses and a higher
degree of volatility of the Dutch economy than the distress of a firm in the
wholesale and retail sector
Globalization as a determinant of
systemic risk
Introduction
the rapid growth of financial markets over the recent decades
and the recurrence of financial crises along with the development
of new and more sophisticated financial instruments have
reinforced the need for accurate and efficientvolatility forecasting
tools. Furthermore, the latent character of the actual stock
market volatility makes the forecasting exercise more challenging
• The VIX, publicly disseminated by the Chicago Board OptionExchange
(CBOE) and commonly referred to as the “world’s barom-eter of market
volatility”, was the first successful attempt at creating and implementing a
volatility index. Its success has pavedthe way for other marketplaces to build
their own implied volatilityindexes. The VIX relevance arises not only from its
forward-lookingnature, since it embeds market sentiment and/or investors
expectations about future states, but also because it forms the backbone of a
host of volatility derivatives, particularly variance swaps.The expected
premium from selling a stock market variance in aswap contract reflects the
variance risk premium as the difference between the expected realized
variance and its risk-neutral counterpart
• The current paper attempts to investigating the information content of both implied volatility
and variance risk premium in terms of forecasting the VaR for international stock market
indexes. More specifically, this paper aims to analyse and appraise the practical usefulness
of volatility estimates from various volatility forecasting methodologies including Risk Metrics,
implied volatility and GARCH models with and without implied volatility under the VaR
framework.
• This paper contributes to the literature in a number of ways. The first contribution is to further
account for the variance risk premium as a potential predictor, and to fairly compare its
performance to both implied volatility and time series models.
• The second contribution consists in expanding upon the financial literature regarding the
market risk modelling by performing a direct comparison of the forecasting performance of
implied volatility and variance risk premium measures across two groups of countries with
different development levels of derivatives markets.
Methodology
•Variance risk premium measures
•VaR backtesting
Empirical Result