Real-Time Gross Settlement and hybrid payment systems: a comparison
AbstractThis paper contrasts Real-Time Gross Settlement and hybrid payment systems that are based on payment offset, using a two-period, multi-bank model. The comparison is performed according to two criteria: liquidity needs and speed of settlement. We assume that the existence of a payment is common knowledge but that the specific degree of time-criticality of a payment is the private information of the bank sending the payment. Hybrid payment systems are shown to outperform Real-Time Gross Settlement when payments are offset in the first period and when they are offset in both periods. This suggests that in a hybrid system, the offsetting facility should be in operation all day, or, at the very least, for some time after the system opens in the morning. A system in which the offsetting facility was only switched on late in the day would not necessarily be preferred to Real-Time Gross Settlement. These results are shown to be robust to changes in the transparency of the central queue of payments awaiting offset. However, this robustness may not hold with different forms of information asymmetry.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Bank of England in its series Bank of England working papers with number 252.
Date of creation: Mar 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Publications Group Bank of England Threadneedle Street London EC2R 8AH
Phone: +44 (0)171 601 4030
Fax: +44 (0)171 601 5196
Web page: http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/
More information through EDIRC
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2005-04-24 (All new papers)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Bech, Morten L. & Garratt, Rod, 2001.
"The Intraday Liquidity Management Game,"
University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series
qt0m6035wg, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
- William Roberds, 1993. "The rise of electronic payments networks and the future role of the Fed with regard to payment finality," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, issue Mar, pages 1-22.
- repec:fth:bfdipa:16/99 is not listed on IDEAS
- Kobayakawa, Shuji, 1997. "The Comparative Analysis of Settlement Systems," CEPR Discussion Papers 1667, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- S. Illeris & G. Akehurst, 2002. "Introduction," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 1-3, January.
- Angelini, Paolo, 1998. "An analysis of competitive externalities in gross settlement systems," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-18, January.
- Leinonen, Harry & Soramäki, Kimmo, 1999. "Optimizing Liquidity Usage and Settlement Speed in Payment Systems," Research Discussion Papers 16/1999, Bank of Finland.
- Kahn, Charles M. & Roberds, William, 2009. "Why pay? An introduction to payments economics," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 1-23, January.
- Antoine Martin & James McAndrews, 2007.
282, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
- Merrouche, Ouarda & Schanz, Jochen, 2010.
"Banks' intraday liquidity management during operational outages: Theory and evidence from the UK payment system,"
Journal of Banking & Finance,
Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 314-323, February.
- Merrouche, Ouarda & Schanz, Jochen, 2009. "Banks' intraday liquidity management during operational outages: theory and evidence from the UK payment system," Bank of England working papers 370, Bank of England.
- Antoine Martin & James McAndrews, 2008.
"A study of competing designs for a liquidity-saving mechanism,"
336, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
- Martin, Antoine & McAndrews, James, 2010. "A study of competing designs for a liquidity-saving mechanism," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1818-1826, August.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Publications Team).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.