IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this book chapter or follow this series

Divergence of risk indicators and the conditions for market discipline in banking

  • Jens Forssbaeck
Registered author(s):

    Accurate measurement of bank risk is a matter of considerable importance for bank regulation and supervision. Current practices in most countries emphasize reliance on financial statement data for assessing banks’ risk. However, the possibility of increased reliance on market-based risk indicators has been a topic for academic and regulatory debate for a long time. Market monitoring of bank risk has typically been tested by regressing market-based risk indicators on various benchmark indicators (such as accounting ratios and credit ratings) to detect whether the market tracks bank risk. This approach overlooks the methodological ‘unobservability’ problem that testing one imperfect proxy indicator against another, when the true value (in this case, a bank’s ‘true’ risk) is unknown, must yield limited conclusions as to the appropriateness of either indicator – particularly in the event of failure to establish a significant association. This paper assesses the relative information content of different risk indicators indirectly by associating the divergence between these indicators with the institutional setting. Empirical results for a large panel of banks worldwide suggest that market-based indicators are often more accurate than accounting indicators for high levels of institutional quality. In particular, spreads on subordinated debt may be more informative than either equity-based or accounting-based measures if the institutional conditions for market discipline to function are favourable. In addition, a combination measure incorporating both accounting and market data has superior accuracy regardless of the level of institutional quality, indicating that market data may contain complementary information on risk. These results cast doubt on the validity of the conclusions drawn in several previous studies that reject market discipline based on the finding that market-based risk indicators do not correspond well with various standard non-market indicators.

    If 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.

    File URL:
    File Function: Main Text
    Download Restriction: no

    in new window

    This chapter was published in:
  • Jens Forssbæck, 2011. "Divergence of risk indicators and the conditions for market discipline in banking," SUERF Studies, SUERF - The European Money and Finance Forum, number 2011/4, February.
  • This item is provided by SUERF - The European Money and Finance Forum in its series Chapters in SUERF Studies with number 66-1.
    Handle: RePEc:erf:erfssc:66-1
    Contact details of provider: Postal: SUERF c/o OeNB, Otto-Wagner-Platz 3, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
    Phone: +43/1/404 20 7216
    Fax: +43/1/404 20 7298
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    Order Information: Postal: SUERF c/o OeNB, Otto-Wagner-Platz 3, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Diana Hancock & Urs W. Birchler, 2004. "What Does the Yield on Subordinated Bank Debt Measure?," Working Papers 2004-02, Swiss National Bank.
    2. Rafael LaPorta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, . "Law and Finance," Working Paper 19451, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    3. Angkinand, Apanard & Wihlborg, Clas, 2010. "Deposit insurance coverage, ownership, and banks' risk-taking in emerging markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 252-274, March.
    4. Douglas D. Evanoff & Larry D. Wall, 2000. "Subordinated debt and bank capital reform," Working Paper Series WP-00-7, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    5. Park, Sangkyun & Peristiani, Stavros, 1998. "Market Discipline by Thrift Depositors," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 347-64, August.
    6. Krainer, John & Lopez, Jose A, 2004. "Incorporating Equity Market Information into Supervisory Monitoring Models," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 36(6), pages 1043-67, December.
    7. Barth,James R. & Caprio,Gerard & Levine,Ross, 2006. "Rethinking Bank Regulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521855761.
    8. Andrea Sironi, 2000. "Testing for market discipline in the European banking industry: evidence from subordinated debt issues," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2000-40, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    9. Goyal, Vidhan K., 2005. "Market discipline of bank risk: Evidence from subordinated debt contracts," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 318-350, July.
    10. Gropp, Reint & Vesala, Jukka & Vulpes, Giuseppe, 2002. "Equity and bond market signals as leading indicators of bank fragility," Working Paper Series 0150, European Central Bank.
    11. Douglas D. Evanoff & Larry D. Wall, 2001. "Sub-debt yield spreads as bank risk measures," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2001-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    12. Fabian Valencia & Luc Laeven, 2008. "Systemic Banking Crises: A New Database," IMF Working Papers 08/224, International Monetary Fund.
    13. Crouzille, Celine & Lepetit, Laetitia & Tarazi, Amine, 2004. "Bank stock volatility, news and asymmetric information in banking: an empirical investigation," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(4-5), pages 443-461.
    14. Bongini, Paola & Laeven, Luc & Majnoni, Giovanni, 2002. "How good is the market at assessing bank fragility? A horse race between different indicators," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1011-1028, May.
    15. Sironi, Andrea, 2002. "Strengthening banks' market discipline and leveling the playing field: Are the two compatible?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1065-1091, May.
    16. Douglas D. Evanoff & Larry D. Wall, 2001. "Measures of the riskiness of banking organizations: Subordinated debt yields, risk-based capital, and examination ratings," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2001-25, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erf:erfssc:66-1. 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: (Dragana Popovic)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.