Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far?
Purpose – Bank securitisation is deemed to have been a major contributing factor to the 2007/2008 financial crises via fuelling credit growth accompanied by lower banks’ credit standards. Yet, prior to the crisis a common view was that securitisation activity makes the financial system more stable a...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Default Article |
Published: |
2016
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/2134/21693 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
id |
rr-article-9500771 |
---|---|
record_format |
Figshare |
spelling |
rr-article-95007712016-01-01T00:00:00Z Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? Alper Kara (1251537) Aydin Ozkan (7198718) Yener Altunbas (7198721) Other commerce, management, tourism and services not elsewhere classified Financial crisis Bank risk taking Securitization Business and Management not elsewhere classified Purpose – Bank securitisation is deemed to have been a major contributing factor to the 2007/2008 financial crises via fuelling credit growth accompanied by lower banks’ credit standards. Yet, prior to the crisis a common view was that securitisation activity makes the financial system more stable as risk was more easily diversified, managed and allocated economy-wide. The purpose of this paper is to review the extant literature to explore the so far generated knowledge on the impact of securitisation on banking risks. In particular, the authors examine the theoretical arguments and empirical studies on securitisation and banking risks before and after the global financial crisis of 2007/2008. Design/methodology/approach – Review and discussion of the literature. Findings – Theoretical literature univocally accentuate the undesirable consequences of securitisation, which may promote retention of riskier loans, undermine banks’ screening and monitoring incentives and enhance banks’ risk appetite. However, empirical evidence does not uniformly support the theoretical conclusions. If banks are securitisation active they lend more to risky borrowers, have less diversified portfolios and hold less capital, retain riskier loans and are aggressive in loan pricing. Others argue that securitisation reduces banks insolvency risk, increases profitability, provides liquidity and leads to greater supply of loans. Mortgage securitisation is an area where there is consistent evidence of bank risk taking via securitisation. Originality/value – The paper identifies open issues for future research. 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z Text Journal contribution 2134/21693 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Securitisation_and_banking_risks_what_do_we_know_so_far_/9500771 CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 |
institution |
Loughborough University |
collection |
Figshare |
topic |
Other commerce, management, tourism and services not elsewhere classified Financial crisis Bank risk taking Securitization Business and Management not elsewhere classified |
spellingShingle |
Other commerce, management, tourism and services not elsewhere classified Financial crisis Bank risk taking Securitization Business and Management not elsewhere classified Alper Kara Aydin Ozkan Yener Altunbas Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
description |
Purpose – Bank securitisation is deemed to have been a major contributing factor to the 2007/2008 financial crises via fuelling credit growth accompanied by lower banks’ credit standards. Yet, prior to the crisis a common view was that securitisation activity makes the financial system more stable as risk was more easily diversified, managed and allocated economy-wide. The purpose of this paper is to review the extant literature to explore the so far generated knowledge on the impact of securitisation on banking risks. In particular, the authors examine the theoretical arguments and empirical studies on securitisation and banking risks before and after the global financial crisis of 2007/2008. Design/methodology/approach – Review and discussion of the literature. Findings – Theoretical literature univocally accentuate the undesirable consequences of securitisation, which may promote retention of riskier loans, undermine banks’ screening and monitoring incentives and enhance banks’ risk appetite. However, empirical evidence does not uniformly support the theoretical conclusions. If banks are securitisation active they lend more to risky borrowers, have less diversified portfolios and hold less capital, retain riskier loans and are aggressive in loan pricing. Others argue that securitisation reduces banks insolvency risk, increases profitability, provides liquidity and leads to greater supply of loans. Mortgage securitisation is an area where there is consistent evidence of bank risk taking via securitisation. Originality/value – The paper identifies open issues for future research. |
format |
Default Article |
author |
Alper Kara Aydin Ozkan Yener Altunbas |
author_facet |
Alper Kara Aydin Ozkan Yener Altunbas |
author_sort |
Alper Kara (1251537) |
title |
Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
title_short |
Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
title_full |
Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
title_fullStr |
Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
title_sort |
securitisation and banking risks: what do we know so far? |
publishDate |
2016 |
url |
https://hdl.handle.net/2134/21693 |
_version_ |
1794840779828494336 |