The Basel III net stable funding ratio and a risk-return tradeoff: Bank-level evidence from Vietnam.

The Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) liquidity rule under Basel III guidelines is designed to handle long-term liquidity risk, promoting the sustainable structures of bank funding. This study estimates the NSFR and analyses the impact of this liquidity ratio on banks according to a risk-return trade-off in Vietnam prior to the Basel III implementation. Using yearly data for commercial banks from 2007 to 2018, I find that banks with higher NSFR gain more potential benefits than banks with lower NSFR. Concretely, a rise in NSFR increases bank profitability and decreases bank funding costs, credit risks and liquidity creation, as evidenced by a comprehensive set of alternative measures. The findings of this study offer insightful implications on the bank policy framework advocating the Basel III liquidity regulation in Vietnam as well as other emerging markets.

Global Banking and Firm Financing: A Double Adverse Selection Channel of International Transmission

This paper proposes a "double adverse selection channel" of international transmission. It shows, theoretically and empirically, that financial systems with both global and local banks exhibit double adverse selection in credit allocation across firms. Global (local) banks have a comparative advantage in extracting information on global (local) risk, and this double information asymmetry creates a segmented credit market where each bank lends to the worst firms in terms of the unobserved risk factor. Given a bank funding (e.g., monetary policy) shock, double adverse selection affects firm financing at the extensive and price margins, generating spillover and amplification effects across countries.

Dynamics of Funding Liquidity and Risk-Taking: Evidence from Commercial Banks

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of funding liquidity risk on the banks’ risk-taking behavior. To test the hypotheses, we apply the two-step system GMM technique on US commercial banks data from 2002 to 2018. We find that funding liquidity increases the banks’ risk-taking of US commercial banks. Furthermore, banks with higher deposits are less likely to face a funding shortage, and bank managers’ aggressive risk-taking activity is less likely to be monitored. Our findings infer that increases in bank funding liquidity increase both risk-weighted assets and liquidity creation, and deposit insurance creates a moral risk issue for banks taking excessive risks in response to deposit rises. The relationship between funding liquidity and the banks’ risk-taking varies with their capitalization and market conditions; the impact of funding liquidity on risk-taking is pronounced for well-capitalized banks and the Global Financial Crisis 2007. Our tests are robust for the usage of alternate proxy of funding liquidity and by controlling economic conditions. The findings of this study have implications for regulators to develop guidelines for the level of liquidity and risk-taking of commercial banks.

The Role of Regulatory Capital and Ownership Structure in Bank Liquidity Creation: Evidence From Emerging Asian Economies

We examine the effect of regulatory capital and ownership structure on banks’ liquidity creation in emerging Asian economies. We find a positive association between regulatory capital and bank liquidity creation, which is consistent with the risk-absorption hypothesis. Bank size has a positive relation with liquidity creation, implying that large banks have more capacity to create liquidity as they enjoy more of the safety net provided by lenders of last resort in the event of crisis, the advantage of reputational benefit, and easier access to external market funding. The negative effect of the bank funding structure is that, as the subordinate debt is typically uninsured, higher funding costs lead banks to reduce liquidity creation. The results imply that an increase in interest rates worsens liquidity creation. For ownership structure, the results show the significance of the impact of ownership concentration on liquidity creation. Banking institutions having higher equity and higher concentration ownership leads to improved liquidity creation.