IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedlrv/y2002ijan.p47-63nv.84no.1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Could a CAMELS downgrade model improve off-site surveillance?

Author

Listed:
  • R. Alton Gilbert
  • Andrew P. Meyer
  • Mark D. Vaughan

Abstract

The Federal Reserve’s off-site surveillance system includes two econometric models that are collectively known as the System for Estimating Examination Ratings (SEER). One model, the SEER risk rank model, uses the latest financial statements to estimate the probability that each Fed-supervised bank will fail in the next two years. The other component, the SEER rating model, uses the latest financial statements to produce a “shadow” CAMELS rating for each supervised bank. Banks identified as risky by either model receive closer supervisory scrutiny than other state-member banks.> Because many of the banks flagged by the SEER models have already tumbled into poor condition and, hence, would already be receiving considerable supervisory attention, we developed an alternative model to identify safe-and-sound banks that potentially are headed for financial distress. Such a model could help supervisors allocate scarce on- and off-site resources by pointing out banks not currently under scrutiny that need watching.> It is possible, however, that our alternative model improves little over the current SEER framework. All three models—the SEER risk rank model, the SEER rating model, and our downgrade model—produce ordinal rankings based on overall risk. If the financial factors that explain CAMELS downgrades differ little from the financial factors that explain failures or CAMELS ratings, then all three models will produce similar risk ratings and, hence, similar watch lists of one- and two-rated banks.> We find only slight differences in the ability of the three models to spot emerging financial distress among safe-and-sound banks. In out-of-sample tests for 1992 through 1998, the watch lists produced by the downgrade model outperform the watch lists produced by the SEER models by only a small margin. We conclude that, in relatively tranquil banking environments like the 1990s, a downgrade model adds little value in off-site surveillance. We caution, however, that a downgrade model might prove useful in more turbulent banking times.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Alton Gilbert & Andrew P. Meyer & Mark D. Vaughan, 2002. "Could a CAMELS downgrade model improve off-site surveillance?," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jan., pages 47-63.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedlrv:y:2002:i:jan.:p:47-63:n:v.84no.1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://files.stlouisfed.org/files/htdocs/publications/review/02/01/47-64Gilbert.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donald Morgan & Kevin Stiroh, 2001. "Market Discipline of Banks: The Asset Test," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 20(2), pages 195-208, October.
    2. Berger, Allen N, 1995. "The Relationship between Capital and Earnings in Banking," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 27(2), pages 432-456, May.
    3. Robert DeYoung, 1999. "Birth, growth, and life or death of newly chartered banks," Economic Perspectives, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, issue Q III, pages 18-35.
    4. Rebel A. Cole & Jeffery W. Gunther, 1995. "FIMS: a new monitoring system for banking institutions," Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), issue Jan, pages 1-15.
    5. Demsetz, Rebecca S & Strahan, Philip E, 1997. "Diversification, Size, and Risk at Bank Holding Companies," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 29(3), pages 300-313, August.
    6. Gunther, Jeffery W. & Moore, Robert R., 2003. "Early warning models in real time," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(10), pages 1979-2001, October.
    7. Arturo Estrella & Sangkyun Park & Stavros Peristiani, 2000. "Capital ratios as predictors of bank failure," Economic Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, issue Jul, pages 33-52.
    8. Allen, Linda & Saunders, Anthony, 1992. "Bank window dressing: Theory and evidence," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 585-623, June.
    9. Flannery, Mark J & Houston, Joel F, 1999. "The Value of a Government Monitor for U.S. Banking Firms," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 31(1), pages 14-34, February.
    10. R. Alton Gilbert & Andrew P. Meyer & Mark D. Vaughan, 1999. "The role of supervisory screens and econometric models in off-site surveillance," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Nov, pages 31-56.
    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. Kraft, Evan & Galac, Tomislav, 2007. "Deposit interest rates, asset risk and bank failure in Croatia," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 312-336, March.
    2. Peresetsky, A. A., 2011. "What factors drive the Russian banks license withdrawal," MPRA Paper 41507, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Peresetsky, Anatoly, 2013. "Modeling reasons for Russian bank license withdrawal: Unaccounted factors," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 30(2), pages 49-64.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bank supervision;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:fip:fedlrv:y:2002:i:jan.:p:47-63:n:v.84no.1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Anna Oates). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/frbslus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.