Funding and credit risk with locally elliptical portfolio processes: an application to central counterparties

Author(s):  
Leif Andersen ◽  
Andrew Dickinson
2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 343-362
Author(s):  
Latif Cem Osken ◽  
Ceylan Onay ◽  
Gözde Unal

Purpose This paper aims to analyze the dynamics of the security lending process and lending markets to identify the market-wide variables reflecting the characteristics of the stock borrowed and to measure the credit risk arising from lending contracts. Design/methodology/approach Using the data provided by Istanbul Settlement and Custody Bank on the equity lending contracts of Securities Lending and Borrowing Market between 2010 and 2012 and the data provided by Borsa Istanbul on Equity Market transactions for the same timeframe, this paper analyzes whether stock price volatility, stock returns, return per unit amount of risk and relative liquidity of lending market and equity market affect the defaults of lending contracts by using both linear regression and ordinary least squares regression for robustness and proxying the concepts of relative liquidity, volatility and return constructs by more than variable to correlate findings. Findings The results illustrate a statistically significant relationship between volatility and the default state of the lending contracts but fail to establish a connection between default states and stock returns or relative liquidity of markets. Research limitations/implications With the increasing pressure for clearing security lending contracts in central counterparties, it is imperative for both central counterparties and regulators to be able to precisely measure the risk exposure due to security lending transactions. The results gained from a limited set of lending transactions merit further studies to identify non-borrower and non-systemic credit risk determinants. Originality/value This is the first study to analyze the non-borrower and non-systemic credit risk determinants in security lending markets.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 25-39
Author(s):  
Maria Carapeto ◽  
Mauricio Acosta

The purpose of this paper is to estimate the benefits from adopting close-out netting to decrease the exposure to counterparty risk across the world markets and to establish the additional benefits from central counterparties towards decreasing counterparty risk. The novelty of the approach is to estimate a figure for counterparty credit risk (CCR) grouping together most of the financial transactions that generate counterparty risk and to analyze the benefit of netting possibilities in reducing the overall risk exposure, using three different scenarios. In the first scenario, counterparty credit risk is calculated assuming that no close-out netting is possible across different contracts. The second scenario assumes bilateral negotiations and netting across contracts. The third scenario contemplates the existence of a central counterparty as the center of transactions. Benefits from netting and central counterparty are assessed by comparing the risk exposure in each scenario. Results from the model show that netting provides a decrease in world counterparty risk of over $17 trillion. Netting is thus a powerful tool available in the world markets to manage counterparty risk while decreasing systemic risk, and as such policies to facilitate and standardize netting procedures across different jurisdictions should be encouraged. Moreover, results show that the use of central counterparties for settling the outstanding contracts would additionally decrease CCR by over $2 trillion.


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly D. Dages ◽  
John W. Jones ◽  
Bailey Klinger
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
pp. 49-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. E. Mamonov

Our analysis documents that the existence of hidden “holes” in the capital of not yet failed banks - while creating intertemporal pressure on the actual level of capital - leads to changing of maturity of loans supplied rather than to contracting of their volume. Long-term loans decrease, whereas short-term loans rise - and, what is most remarkably, by approximately the same amounts. Standardly, the higher the maturity of loans the higher the credit risk and, thus, the more loan loss reserves (LLP) banks are forced to create, increasing the pressure on capital. Banks that already hide “holes” in the capital, but have not yet faced with license withdrawal, must possess strong incentives to shorten the maturity of supplied loans. On the one hand, it raises the turnovers of LLP and facilitates the flexibility of capital management; on the other hand, it allows increasing the speed of shifting of attracted deposits to loans to related parties in domestic or foreign jurisdictions. This enlarges the potential size of ex post revealed “hole” in the capital and, therefore, allows us to assume that not every loan might be viewed as a good for the economy: excessive short-term and insufficient long-term loans can produce the source for future losses.


2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (8) ◽  
pp. 31-37
Author(s):  
Nayan J. Nayan J. ◽  
◽  
Dr. M. Kumaraswamy Dr. M. Kumaraswamy

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document