IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rut/rutres/201802.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Bad Is a Bad Loan? Distinguishing Inherent Credit Risk from Inefficient Lending (Does the Capital Market Price This Difference?)

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph Hughes

    () (Rutgers University)

  • Choon-Geol Moon

    () (Hanyang University)

Abstract

We develop a novel technique to decompose banks’ ratio of nonperforming loans to total loans into three components: first, a minimum ratio that represents best-practice lending given the volume and composition of a bank’s loans, the average contractual interest rate charged on these loans, and market conditions such as the average GDP growth rate and market concentration; second, a ratio, the difference between the bank’s observed ratio of nonperforming loans, adjusted for statistical noise, and the best-practice minimum ratio, that represents the bank’s proficiency at loan making; third, a statistical noise. The best-practice ratio of nonperforming loans, the ratio a bank would experience if it were fully efficient at credit-risk evaluation and loan monitoring, represents the inherent credit risk of the loan portfolio and is estimated by a stochastic frontier technique. We apply the technique to 2013 data on top-tier U.S. bank holding companies which we divide into five size groups. The largest banks with consolidated assets exceeding $250 billion experience the highest ratio of nonperformance among the five groups. Moreover, the inherent credit risk of their lending is the highest among the five groups. On the other hand, their inefficiency at lending is one of the lowest among the five. Thus, the high ratio of nonperformance of the largest financial institutions appears to result from lending to riskier borrowers, not inefficiency at lending. Small community banks under $1 billion also exhibit higher inherent credit risk than all other size groups except the largest banks. In contrast, their loan-making inefficiency is highest among the five size groups. Restricting the sample to publicly traded bank holding companies and gauging financial performance by market value, we find the ratio of nonperforming loans to total loans is on average negatively related to financial performance except at the largest banks. When nonperformance, adjusted for statistical noise, is decomposed into inherent credit risk and lending inefficiency, taking more inherent credit risk enhances market value at many more large banks while lending inefficiency is negatively related to market value at all banks. Market discipline appears to reward riskier lending at large banks and discourage lending inefficiency at all banks.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph Hughes & Choon-Geol Moon, 2018. "How Bad Is a Bad Loan? Distinguishing Inherent Credit Risk from Inefficient Lending (Does the Capital Market Price This Difference?)," Departmental Working Papers 201802, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:rut:rutres:201802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sas.rutgers.edu/virtual/snde/wp/2018-02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mester, Loretta J. & Hughes, Joseph P. & Jagtiani, Julapa, 2016. "Is Bigger Necessarily Better in Community Banking?," Working Paper 1615, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    2. Berger, Allen N. & Mester, Loretta J., 1997. "Inside the black box: What explains differences in the efficiencies of financial institutions?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(7), pages 895-947, July.
    3. Mitchell A. Petersen & Raghuram G. Rajan, 1995. "The Effect of Credit Market Competition on Lending Relationships," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(2), pages 407-443.
    4. Joseph P. Hughes & Loretta J. Mester & Choon-Geol Moon, 2016. "Market Discipline Working for and Against Financial Stability: The Two Faces of Equity Capital in U.S. Commercial Banking," Departmental Working Papers 201611, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    5. Jondrow, James & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Materov, Ivan S. & Schmidt, Peter, 1982. "On the estimation of technical inefficiency in the stochastic frontier production function model," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 233-238, August.
    6. David F. Hendry, 2013. "Econometric Modelling: The ‘Consumption Function’ In Retrospect," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 60(5), pages 495-522, November.
    7. Julia Campos & Neil R. Ericsson (ed.), 2005. "General-to-Specific Modelling," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 2417.
    8. Donald Morgan & Adam Ashcraft, 2003. "Using Loan Rates to Measure and Regulate Bank Risk: Findings and an Immodest Proposal," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 24(2), pages 181-200, October.
    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. Hughes, Joseph P. & Jagtiani, Julapa & Mester, Loretta J. & Moon, Choon-Geol, 2018. "Does Scale Matter in Community Bank Performance? Evidence Obtained by Applying Several New Measures of Performance," Working Papers 18-11, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    commercial banking; credit risk; nonperforming loans; lending efficiency;

    JEL classification:

    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • C58 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Financial Econometrics

    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:rut:rutres:201802. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/derutus.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.