content here is the anonymously transparent proxied version of ecb.europa.eu   X
European Central Bank - eurosystem
Zoekopties
Home Media Explainers Onderzoek & publicaties Statistieken Monetair beleid De euro Betalingsverkeer & markten Werken bij de ECB
Suggesties
Sorteren op
Niet beschikbaar in het Nederlands

Francesca Lenoci

22 November 2023
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2023
Details
Abstract
This special feature builds on the concept of maturity gap as a metric of banks’ maturity mismatch to shed light on how banks’ engagement in maturity transformation differs across euro area countries and bank types. Banks can mitigate the interest rate risk stemming from their maturity mismatch by using derivatives for hedging purposes. Euro area banks increased their positions in interest rate derivatives over the last two years in anticipation of the start of monetary policy normalisation. Significant institutions rely more than cooperative and savings banks on interest rate derivatives and have a more diversified positioning. A box within the special feature finds that this greater reliance on derivatives was not sufficient to compensate for the material increase in interest rate risk. The extent of banks’ maturity mismatch determines the sensitivity of their net interest income to changes in interest rates and the slope of the yield curve. This special feature provides empirical evidence that the more banks engage in maturity transformation, the more their net interest margin benefits from a steepening of the yield curve, boosting bank profits. This effect might dissipate going forward, especially for banks in countries where variable-rate lending predominates.
JEL Code
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G32 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→Financing Policy, Financial Risk and Risk Management, Capital and Ownership Structure, Value of Firms, Goodwill
31 May 2023
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2023
Details
Abstract
The box investigates whether banks step in when market-based credit declines in the face of increased market volatility and rising interest rates. Findings show that banks tend to offer lower rates than bond markets to larger, better-rated and more leveraged firms, but interest rates are not the only factor behind firms’ financial structure decisions. Many firms replaced bond funding with bank loans at the start of the pandemic, at the onset of the Russia-Ukraine war and during the recent monetary policy normalisation, potentially crowding out credit to riskier and smaller firms with limited ability to tap bond markets.
JEL Code
E51 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Money Supply, Credit, Money Multipliers
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G23 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Non-bank Financial Institutions, Financial Instruments, Institutional Investors
G30 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→General
30 May 2023
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2023
Details
Abstract
Banks are connected to non-bank financial intermediation (NBFI) sector entities via loans, securities and derivatives exposures, as well as funding dependencies. Linkages with the NBFI sector expose banks to liquidity, market and credit risks. Funding from NBFI entities would appear to be the most likely and strongest spillover channel, considering that NBFI entities maintain their liquidity buffers primarily as deposits and very short-term repo transactions with banks. At the same time, direct credit exposures are smaller and are often related to NBFI entities associated with banking groups. Links with NBFI entities are highly concentrated in a small group of systemically important banks, whose sizeable capital and liquidity buffers are essential to mitigate spillover risks.
JEL Code
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G22 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Insurance, Insurance Companies, Actuarial Studies
G23 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Non-bank Financial Institutions, Financial Instruments, Institutional Investors
16 November 2022
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2022
Details
Abstract
Energy sector firms use energy derivatives under different strategies depending on their main area of activity, business model and exposure to risk in physical markets. The significant volatility and skyrocketing prices seen in energy markets since March 2022 have resulted in large margin calls, generating liquidity risks for derivatives users. Strategies employed by companies to alleviate liquidity stress may lead to an accumulation of credit risk for their lenders or their counterparties in less collateralised segments of the derivatives market. Further price increases would accentuate nascent vulnerabilities, creating additional stress in a concentrated market. These issues underline the need to review margining practices and enhance the liquidity preparedness of all market participants to deal with large margin calls.
JEL Code
Q02 : Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics, Environmental and Ecological Economics→General→Global Commodity Markets
G13 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Contingent Pricing, Futures Pricing
G20 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→General
16 November 2022
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2022
Details
Abstract
Interest rate swaps account for the largest share of the euro area derivatives market. Outstanding contracts on EURIBOR swaps have risen sharply since 2021, possibly reflecting expectations of monetary policy normalisation. Using trade repository data on individual EURIBOR swap trades between 2019 and 2022, this box identifies how the risk is being shared across sectors in the interest rate swaps market and who would pay margins to whom should rates change. Empirical findings show that euro area banks are among the most active counterparties in EURIBOR swaps, due to either their role as market-makers or their need to hedge interest rate risk. Investment funds, insurance companies and pension funds would need to make margin payments in the event of rising interest rates.
JEL Code
G12 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Asset Pricing, Trading Volume, Bond Interest Rates
G13 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Contingent Pricing, Futures Pricing
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G22 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Insurance, Insurance Companies, Actuarial Studies
G23 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Non-bank Financial Institutions, Financial Instruments, Institutional Investors
G24 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Investment Banking, Venture Capital, Brokerage, Ratings and Ratings Agencies
E43 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Interest Rates: Determination, Term Structure, and Effects
E44 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
25 May 2022
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2022
Details
Abstract
Relying on an economic value approach and exploiting granular supervisory data on euro area banks, this box finds that the aggregate impact of higher interest rates on bank net worth would be moderately negative, but wide variations exist at the level of individual banks. Over time, derivatives have played an offsetting role, allowing banks to reduce their interest rate risk exposures arising from on- and off-balance-sheet positioning. In line with the expectation of higher interest rates, empirical evidence from EMIR data shows that banks have increased the volume of longer-dated interest rate swaps on which they receive floating rates, mainly trading these contracts with insurance companies and pension funds.
JEL Code
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G12 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Asset Pricing, Trading Volume, Bond Interest Rates
20 November 2019
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2019
Details
Abstract
When investment funds face outflows, fund managers may have to liquidate parts of their portfolio, potentially changing its composition and riskiness as a result. If fund managers respond to outflows by selling securities proportionally to the initial asset allocation, i.e. selling a vertical slice of the portfolio, the liquidity and risk profile of the fund remains unchanged. But asset managers might have incentives to reduce the portfolio non-proportionally. For example, in trying to avoid incurring losses on illiquid assets, managers might choose to sell the most liquid securities first. And in the hope of increasing returns and attracting future inflows, they might choose to take on more risk in their portfolio. Other managers, worried about future outflows, might hoard liquid securities and de-risk their portfolios. However, large sales of illiquid securities may affect their market price at times of relatively low market liquidity, with possible spillovers to other financial institutions holding the same assets.