IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ofr/wpaper/15-20.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Difficult Business of Measuring Banks' Liquidity: Understanding the Liquidity Coverage Ratio

Author

Listed:
  • Jill Cetina

    (Office of Financial Research)

  • Katherine Gleason

    (Office of Financial Research)

Abstract

In the wake of the financial crisis of 2007-09, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision recommended bank regulators adopt a new short-term liquidity requirement, the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), to promote greater liquidity resilience. U.S. bank regulators announced the final rule implementing that recommendation in 2014. We highlight complexities in interpreting LCRs under both Basel III and the U.S. rule when banks undertake transactions that simultaneously affect the LCR numerator and denominator, and therefore, the ratio itself. Furthermore, we show how the numerator and denominator caps in the LCR formulas introduce nonlinearities that add to the complexity of interpreting changes in the metric. LCRs calculated under the U.S. rule are more volatile and difficult to interpret than LCRs calculated under the Basel standard. This is because the U.S. rule adds a time dimension to the LCR’s volatility through inclusion of a maturity mismatch add-on term in the denominator to account for the peak-day net cash outflow during the 30-day window. Unlike some other regulatory ratios, bank supervisors, analysts, and investors need to have a clear understanding of the mechanics of LCR calculations to interpret the LCR metric, separate signal from noise, and perform informed peer analysis. In this paper, we demonstrate how the LCR is calculated under both Basel and U.S. rules to help market participants, the public, and researchers better understand this new liquidity metric.

Suggested Citation

  • Jill Cetina & Katherine Gleason, 2015. "The Difficult Business of Measuring Banks' Liquidity: Understanding the Liquidity Coverage Ratio," Working Papers 15-20, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
  • Handle: RePEc:ofr:wpaper:15-20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.financialresearch.gov/working-papers/files/OFRwp-2015-20_Measuring-Banks-Liquidity.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2015
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Balasubramanyan, Lakshmi & VanHoose, David D., 2013. "Bank balance sheet dynamics under a regulatory liquidity-coverage-ratio constraint," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 53-67.
    2. Grossman, Sanford J, 1981. "The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure about Product Quality," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 461-483, December.
    3. repec:dgr:kubcen:2012075 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Stefan W. Schmitz, 2013. "The Impact of the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) on the Implementation of Monetary Policy," Economic Notes, Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA, vol. 42(2), pages 135-170, July.
    5. Office of Financial Research (ed.), 2014. "Office of Financial Research 2014 Annual Report," Reports, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury, number 14-1.
    6. Bech, Morten & Keister, Todd, 2017. "Liquidity regulation and the implementation of monetary policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 64-77.
    7. Clemens Bonner & Sylvester C. W. Eijffinger, 2016. "The Impact of Liquidity Regulation on Bank Intermediation," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 20(5), pages 1945-1979.
    8. Paul R. Milgrom, 1981. "Good News and Bad News: Representation Theorems and Applications," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(2), pages 380-391, Autumn.
    9. Jan Willem van den End & Mark Kruidhof, 2013. "Modelling the liquidity ratio as macroprudential instrument," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 14(2), pages 91-106, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kevin F. Kiernan & Vladimir Yankov & Filip Zikes, 2021. "Liquidity Provision and Co-insurance in Bank Syndicates," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2021-060, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).

    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. Li, Boyao & Xiong, Wanting & Chen, Liujun & Wang, Yougui, 2017. "The impact of the liquidity coverage ratio on money creation: A stock-flow based dynamic approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 193-202.
    2. Lilit Popoyan, 2020. "Macroprudential Policy: a Blessing or a Curse?," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 11(1-2).
    3. Riedler, Jesper & Brueckbauer, Frank, 2017. "Evaluating regulation within an artificial financial system: A framework and its application to the liquidity coverage ratio regulation," ZEW Discussion Papers 17-022, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Li, Boyao, 2022. "How does bank equity affect credit creation? Multiplier effects under Basel III regulations," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 299-324.
    5. Ginger Zhe Jin & Andrew Kato & John A. List, 2010. "That’S News To Me! Information Revelation In Professional Certification Markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 104-122, January.
    6. Persson, Petra, 2018. "Attention manipulation and information overload," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 78-106, May.
    7. Wouter Dessein & Alex Frankel & Navin Kartik, 2023. "Test-Optional Admissions," Papers 2304.07551, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    8. Simeon Schudy & Verena Utikal, 2015. "Does imperfect data privacy stop people from collecting personal health data?," TWI Research Paper Series 98, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    9. Roger Bate & Ginger Zhe Jin & Aparna Mathur, 2012. "In Whom We Trust: The Role of Certification Agencies in Online Drug Markets," NBER Working Papers 17955, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Eduardo Perez & Delphine Prady, 2012. "Complicating to Persuade?," Working Papers hal-03583827, HAL.
    11. Haisken-DeNew, John & Hasan, Syed & Jha, Nikhil & Sinning, Mathias, 2018. "Unawareness and selective disclosure: The effect of school quality information on property prices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 449-464.
    12. Eduardo Perez-Richet, 2014. "Interim Bayesian Persuasion: First Steps," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 469-474, May.
    13. V. Bhaskar & Caroline Thomas, 2019. "The Culture of Overconfidence," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 95-110, June.
    14. Shuo Liu & Dimitri Migrow, 2019. "Designing organizations in volatile markets," ECON - Working Papers 319, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    15. Eric Monnet & Miklos Vari, 2023. "A Dilemma between Liquidity Regulation and Monetary Policy: Some History and Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 55(4), pages 915-944, June.
    16. Matthew Plosser & João A. C. Santos, 2014. "Banks' incentives and the quality of internal risk models," Staff Reports 704, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    17. Alexander E. Saak, 2017. "The Value of Delegated Quality Control," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 309-335, June.
    18. George J. Mailath & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson, 2017. "Premuneration Values and Investments in Matching Markets," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(604), pages 2041-2065, September.
    19. Xu Jiang & Ying Xue, 2023. "Morale, performance and disclosure," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 5-23, February.
    20. Gabriele Gratton & Richard Holden & Anton Kolotilin, 2015. "Timing Information Flows," Discussion Papers 2015-16, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.

    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:ofr:wpaper:15-20. 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: Gregory Feldberg (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ofrgvus.html .

    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.