IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedcwp/1616.html

How Do Lead Banks Use Their Private Information about Loan Quality in the Syndicated Loan Market?

Author

Listed:
  • Lakshmi Balasubramanyan
  • Allen N. Berger
  • Matthew Koepke

Abstract

Little is known about how lead banks in the syndicated loan market use their private information about loan quality. We formulate and test two hypotheses, the Signaling Hypothesis and Sophisticated Syndicate Hypothesis. To measure private information, we use Shared National Credit (SNC) internal loan ratings, which we make comparable across banks using concordance tables. We find that favorable private information is associated with higher loan retention by lead banks for term loans, consistent with empirical domination of the Signaling Hypothesis, while neither hypothesis dominates for revolvers. Differences in syndicate structure at least partially explain this disparity.

Suggested Citation

  • Lakshmi Balasubramanyan & Allen N. Berger & Matthew Koepke, 2016. "How Do Lead Banks Use Their Private Information about Loan Quality in the Syndicated Loan Market?," Working Papers (Old Series) 1616, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedcwp:1616
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.clevelandfed.org/newsroom-and-events/publications/working-papers/2017-working-papers/wp-1616r-how-do-lead-banks-use-private-information-in-syndicated-loan-market.aspx
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/newsroom-and-events/publications/working-papers/2016-working-papers/wp-1616-how-lead-banks-use-private-information-in-syndicated-loan-market.aspx
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Beni Kouevi Gath, 2021. "Credit Information Sharing and Bank Stability: Evidence from SSA Countries," Working Papers CEB 21-009, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. De Novellis, G. & Musile Tanzi, P. & Ranalli, M.G. & Stanghellini, E., 2024. "Leveraged finance exposure in the banking system: Systemic risk and interconnectedness," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    3. Hasan, Iftekhar & Kim, Suk-Joong & Politsidis, Panagiotis N. & Wu, Eliza, 2021. "Loan syndication under Basel II: How do firm credit ratings affect the cost of credit?," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    4. Hassan Akram & Adnan Hushmat, 2024. "Bank liquidity creation and solvency risk with moderating role of loan concentration: a comparative study of Islamic and conventional banks in Pakistan and Malaysia," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(4), pages 1-32, December.
    5. Rhys Bidder & John Krainer & Adam Shapiro, 2021. "De-leveraging or de-risking? How banks cope with loss," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 39, pages 100-127, January.
    6. Stijn Claessens & Andy Law & Teng Wang, 2018. "How do credit ratings affect bank lending under capital constraints?," BIS Working Papers 747, Bank for International Settlements.
    7. Kristian S. Blickle & Quirin Fleckenstein & Sebastian Hillenbrand & Anthony Saunders, 2020. "Do Lead Arrangers Retain Their Lead Shares?," Staff Reports 922, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    8. Emilio Abad-Segura & Mariana-Daniela González-Zamar, 2020. "Global Research Trends in Financial Transactions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-32, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages
    • G28 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Government Policy and Regulation

    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:fip:fedcwp:1616. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: 4D Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbclus.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.