Can Market Structure Impact Systemic Risk? Evidence from Trade-Through Prohibition

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Foley ◽  
Julia Reynolds
2017 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 96-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pejman Abedifar ◽  
Paolo Giudici ◽  
Shatha Qamhieh Hashem

2012 ◽  
pp. 32-47
Author(s):  
S. Andryushin ◽  
V. Kuznetsova

The paper analyzes central banks macroprudencial policy and its instruments. The issues of their classification, option, design and adjustment are connected with financial stability of overall financial system and its specific institutions. The macroprudencial instruments effectiveness is evaluated from the two points: how they mitigate temporal and intersectoral systemic risk development (market, credit, and operational). The future macroprudentional policy studies directions are noted to identify the instruments, which can be used to limit the financial systemdevelopment procyclicality, mitigate the credit and financial cycles volatility.


2017 ◽  
pp. 93-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Anchishkina

The article synthesizes information on database analysis of state, municipal, and regulated procurement through which Russian contract institutions and the market model are investigated. The inherent uncertainty of quantity indicators on contracting activities and process is identified and explained. The article provides statistical evidence for heterogeneous market structure in state and municipal procurement, and big player’s dominance. A theoretical model for market behavior, noncooperative competition and collusion is proposed, through which the major trends are explained. The intrinsic flaws and failure of the current contracting model are revealed and described. This ineffectiveness is regarded to be not a limitation, but a challenge to be met. If responded to, drivers for economic growth and market equilibrium will be switched on.


2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 347-355
Author(s):  
Mark Wahrenburg ◽  
Andreas Barth ◽  
Mohammad Izadi ◽  
Anas Rahhal

AbstractStructured products like collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) tend to offer significantly higher yield spreads than corporate bonds (CBs) with the same rating. At the same time, empirical evidence does not indicate that this higher yield is reduced by higher default losses of CLOs. The evidence thus suggests that CLOs offer higher expected returns compared to CB with similar credit risk. This study aims to analyze whether this return difference is captured by asset pricing factors. We show that market risk is the predominant risk factor for both CBs and CLOs. CLO investors, however, additionally demand a premium for their risk exposure towards systemic risk. This premium is inversely related to the rating class of the CLO.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document