IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/boe/boeewp/252.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Real-Time Gross Settlement and hybrid payment systems: a comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Willison

Abstract

This 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Willison, 2005. "Real-Time Gross Settlement and hybrid payment systems: a comparison," Bank of England working papers 252, Bank of England.
  • Handle: RePEc:boe:boeewp:252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/research/Documents/workingpapers/2005/WP252.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Angelini, Paolo, 1998. "An analysis of competitive externalities in gross settlement systems," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-18, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Bech, Morten L. & Garratt, Rod, 2003. "The intraday liquidity management game," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 198-219, April.
    4. S. Illeris & G. Akehurst, 2002. "Introduction," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 1-3, January.
    5. Leinonen, Harry & Soramäki, Kimmo, 1999. "Optimizing liquidity usage and settlement speed in payment systems," Research Discussion Papers 16/1999, Bank of Finland.
    6. Kobayakawa, Shuji, 1997. "The Comparative Analysis of Settlement Systems," CEPR Discussion Papers 1667, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Martin, Antoine & McAndrews, James, 2008. "Liquidity-saving mechanisms," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 554-567, April.
    2. Ball, Alan & Denbee, Edward & Manning, Mark & Wetherilt, Anne, 2011. "Financial Stability Paper No 11: Intraday Liquidity - Risk and Regulation," Bank of England Financial Stability Papers 11, Bank of England.
    3. 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.
    4. Norman, Ben, 2010. "Financial Stability Paper No 7: Liquidity Saving in Real-Time Gross Settlement Systems - an Overview," Bank of England Financial Stability Papers 7, Bank of England.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Jing Yang & Sheri Markose & Amadeo Alentorn, 2005. "Designing large value payment systems: an agent based approach," Computing in Economics and Finance 2005 396, Society for Computational Economics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:boe:boeewp:252. 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: (Digital Media Team). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/boegvuk.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.