IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/prp/micp17/251-261.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Pricing Contingent Convertible Bonds - An Empirical Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Sasa Popovic

    (University of Montenegro, School of Economics, Montenegro)

  • Ana Mugosa

    (University of Montenegro, School of Economics, Montenegro)

Abstract

This article provides analysis of structuring and pricing models for contingent convertible (CoCo) bonds. Financial instability at the beginning of XXI century forced governments to make serious efforts in order to protect financial sector from consequences of future financial crisis. One of these efforts resulted in creating new regulatory framework for bank capital adequacy. In that context a special type of bonds, so-called Contingent Convertibles (CoCo) have become popular in a banking sector. The characteristic of this debt instrument is the possibility to convert into equity, or to be written off, due to the certain trigger event. In that order bonds convert to equity during financial distress. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to analyse the empirical validation of two different CoCo pricing models, equity derivatives model (EDM) and credit derivatives model (CDM), as well as to conduct their comparative analysis. The models are applied on the CoCo’s issued by The Credit Suisse Group AG bond, on the 18th June 2014 with a volume of 2.5 billion USD. This issue has perpetual maturity, mechanical capital trigger, and loss absorption mechanism is permanent principal write-down. The Black-Scholes methodology was used to price the CoCo’s in EDM and CDM. The results show approximately the same trigger level, 3.95 CHF for CDM and 4.37 CHF for EDM, which contributes to the reliability of models applied. This paper contributes to academic literature on complex convertible financial instrument such as CoCo bond by employing empirical approach to selected pricing models. Although some academics and practitioners address many criticisms against CoCo’s, it is evident that these instruments record high volume of issuance and attract lot of professional attention. Black-Scholes model is widely employed in estimation of CoCo bonds price, but recent empirical evidence demonstrates that the basic model assumption of constant volatility is not reasonable, as these instruments carry a lot of fattail risk. Therefore, our future research will be extended to appliance of more calibrated models, meaning simulation based models.

Suggested Citation

  • Sasa Popovic & Ana Mugosa, 2017. "Pricing Contingent Convertible Bonds - An Empirical Approach," MIC 2017: Managing the Global Economy; Proceedings of the Joint International Conference, Monastier di Treviso, Italy, 24–27 May 2017,, University of Primorska Press.
  • Handle: RePEc:prp:micp17:251-261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hippocampus.si/ISBN/978-961-7023-71-8/25.pdf
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leland, Hayne E, 1994. "Corporate Debt Value, Bond Covenants, and Optimal Capital Structure," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1213-1252, September.
    2. Pennacchi, George & Vermaelen, Theo & Wolff, Christian C. P., 2014. "Contingent Capital: The Case of COERCs," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 541-574, June.
    3. Alon Raviv, 2004. "Bank Stability and Market Discipline: Debt-for-Equity Swap versus Subordinated Notes," Finance 0408003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Stefan Avdjiev & Anastasia Kartasheva & Bilyana Bogdanova, 2013. "CoCos: a primer," BIS Quarterly Review, Bank for International Settlements, September.
    5. Paul Glasserman & Behzad Nouri, 2012. "Contingent Capital with a Capital-Ratio Trigger," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1816-1833, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Sigmund & Kevin Zimmermann, 2021. "Determinants of Contingent Convertible Bond Coupon Rates of Banks: An Empirical Analysis (Michael Sigmund, Kevin Zimmermann)," Working Papers 236, Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank).
    2. Caporale, Guglielmo Maria & Kang, Woo-Young, 2021. "On the preferences of CoCo bond buyers and sellers," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Hilscher, Jens & Raviv, Alon, 2014. "Bank stability and market discipline: The effect of contingent capital on risk taking and default probability," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 542-560.
    4. Nan Chen & Paul Glasserman & Behzad Nouri & Markus Pelger, 2013. "CoCos, Bail-In, and Tail Risk," Working Papers 13-01, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
    5. Weidong Tian, 2018. "Callable Contingent Capital: Valuation and Default Risk," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 112-130, January.
    6. Tan, Yingxian & Yang, Zhaojun, 2016. "Contingent capital, capital structure and investment," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 56-73.
    7. Olivier Courtois & Xiaoshan Su, 2020. "Structural Pricing of CoCos and Deposit Insurance with Regime Switching and Jumps," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 27(4), pages 477-520, December.
    8. Pierluigi Bologna & Arianna Miglietta & Anatoli Segura, 2020. "Contagion in the CoCos Market? A Case Study of Two Stress Events," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 16(6), pages 137-184, December.
    9. Berg, Tobias & Kaserer, Christoph, 2015. "Does contingent capital induce excessive risk-taking?," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 356-385.
    10. Michael B. Imerman, 2020. "When enough is not enough: bank capital and the Too-Big-To-Fail subsidy," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1371-1406, November.
    11. Wolff, Christian & Masror Khah, Sara Abed, 2015. "The Determinants of CoCo Bond Prices," CEPR Discussion Papers 10996, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Michael B. Imerman, 0. "When enough is not enough: bank capital and the Too-Big-To-Fail subsidy," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-36.
    13. Goncharenko, Roman & Ongena, Steven & Rauf, Asad, 2021. "The agency of CoCos: Why contingent convertible bonds are not for everyone," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    14. Philippe Oster, 2020. "Contingent Convertible bond literature review: making everything and nothing possible?," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 21(4), pages 343-381, December.
    15. Paul Glasserman & Behzad Nouri, 2012. "Contingent Capital with a Capital-Ratio Trigger," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(10), pages 1816-1833, October.
    16. Das, Sanjiv R. & Kim, Seoyoung, 2015. "Credit spreads with dynamic debt," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 121-140.
    17. Luo, Pengfei & Yang, Zhaojun, 2017. "Real options and contingent convertibles with regime switching," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 122-135.
    18. Kenjiro Hori & Jorge Martin Cerón, 2017. "Contingent Convertible Bonds: Payoff Structures and Incentive Effects," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 1711, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.
    19. Tan, Yingxian & Yang, Zhaojun, 2017. "Growth option, contingent capital and agency conflicts," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 354-369.
    20. Ming, Lei & Yang, Shenggang & Song, Dandan, 2018. "Valuation and analysis of performance sensitive debt with contingent convertibility," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 98-108.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prp:micp17:251-261. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alen Jezovnik (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.hippocampus.si .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.