IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/pennin/95-07.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Banks and Derivatives

Author

Listed:
  • Gary Gorton
  • Richard Rosen

Abstract

The relationship between risk and derivatives is especially important in banking since banks dominate most derivatives markets and, within banking, derivative holdings are concentrated at a few large banks. If large banks are using derivatives to increase risk, then recent losses on derivatives, such as those of Procter and Gamble and Orange County, may seem small in comparison to the losses by banks. If, in addition, the major banks are all taking similar gambles, then the banking system is vulnerable. This paper is the first to estimate the market value and interest rate sensitivity of bank derivative positions. The authors focus on interest rate swaps in the analysis, because interest rate risk is non-diversifiable and because banks naturally are repositories of interest rate risk. Difficulty in monitoring risk is especially important when the party entering into a derivative transaction is an agent managing money for outside principals. Since derivatives are opaque, a realized loss by one organization may be viewed as information about the portfolio positions of other organizations. The problems from derivative transactions thus come from information problems. This points out the need for changes in the accounting rules or investment regulations. When banks use derivatives, the problems are more severe. First, even knowing more about the derivatives position of a bank may not allow outside stakeholders to determine the overall riskiness of the bank. Banks invest in many non-derivative instruments that are illiquid and opaque. Thus, even if the value of their derivative positions were known, it would be hard to know how subject to interest rate and other risks the entire bank would be. This makes them different from most other organizations that invest in derivatives. Second, bank failures can have external effects. The failure of several large banks can lead to the breakdown of the payments system and the collapse of credit markets for firms. It is clear that if banks have similar positions, the failure of one bank is likely to mean the failure of many. Because derivatives are opaque, even if banks have different positions, outside principals may not be able to determine whether the failure of one bank signals trouble at other banks. The authors first estimate interest rate sensitivity using the Call Reports of Income and Condition published by the FDIC. Since the data are insufficient to calculate interest rate sensitivity, or even market value of the derivative position, interest rate, they make simple assumptions that allow them to go from the data available to estimates of market value and interest rate sensitivity. The authors estimates of interest rate sensitivity show that the banking system has a large net swap position. An increase in interest rates reduces the value of bank swap positions. This sensitivity is due to the positions of large banks. Small banks tend to have only minor exposure to interest rates in their swap positions. While these estimates show that large banks have highly interest rate sensitive swap positions, this does not mean that the banks equity positions are interest rate sensitive to the same extent. The banks may use swaps to hedge on-balance sheet interest rate risk or they could use other derivatives markets, such as the futures market, to hedge their swap exposure. The authors found that large banks have mostly hedged swap interest rate risk. The authors suggest that these conclusions may be premature because banks can quickly alter their positions in ways that are hard to monitor. Swaps are opaque so such changes may not be evident to regulators and market participants until it is too late.

Suggested Citation

  • Gary Gorton & Richard Rosen, 1995. "Banks and Derivatives," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 95-07, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:pennin:95-07
    Note: This paper is only available in hard copy
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gorton, Gary & Rosen, Richard, 1995. "Corporate Control, Portfolio Choice, and the Decline of Banking," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1377-1420, December.
    2. Dow, James & Gorton, Gary, 1997. "Noise Trading, Delegated Portfolio Management, and Economic Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 1024-1050, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniel Hoechle & Stefan Ruenzi & Nic Schaub & Markus Schmid, 2018. "Financial Advice and Bank Profits," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 31(11), pages 4447-4492.
    2. Anders Gustafsson, 2019. "Busy doing nothing: why politicians implement inefficient policies," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 282-299, September.
    3. Whidbee, David A. & Wohar, Mark, 1999. "Derivative activities and managerial incentives in the banking industry," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 251-276, September.
    4. Elijah Brewer III & Thomas H. Mondschean & Philip Strahan, 1996. "The Role of Monitoring in Reducing the Moral Hazard Problem Associated with Government Guarantees: Evidence from the Life Insurance Industry," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 96-15, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
    5. Angrisani Marco & Guarino Antonio & Huck Steffen & Larson Nathan C, 2011. "No-Trade in the Laboratory," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-58, April.
    6. Brewer III, Elijah & Minton, Bernadette A. & Moser, James T., 2000. "Interest-rate derivatives and bank lending," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 353-379, March.
    7. Chen, Minghua & Wu, Ji & Jeon, Bang Nam & Wang, Rui, 2017. "Do foreign banks take more risk? Evidence from emerging economies," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 20-39.
    8. Markus Glaser & Martin Weber, 2007. "Overconfidence and trading volume," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, Springer;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 32(1), pages 1-36, June.
    9. Selahattin GURIS & Aynur PALA, 2014. "Equity Returns, Firm-Specific Characteristics and Sector Rotation: Evidence from Turkey," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 4(2), pages 264-276.
    10. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. "The Limits of Arbitrage," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 35-55, March.
    11. Mathias Drehmann & Jörg Oechssler & Andreas Roider, 2005. "Herding and Contrarian Behavior in Financial Markets: An Internet Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1403-1426, December.
    12. Ovi, Nafisa & Bose, Sudipta & Gunasekarage, Abeyratna & Shams, Syed, 2020. "Do the business cycle and revenue diversification matter for banks’ capital buffer and credit risk: Evidence from ASEAN banks," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1).
    13. Xiangbo Liu & Zijun Liu & Zhigang Qiu, 2013. "Stock Market Manipulation in the Presence of Fund Flows," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 14(2), pages 483-491, November.
    14. Armen Hovakimian & Edward J. Kane, 1996. "Risk-Shifting by Federally Insured Commercial Banks," NBER Working Papers 5711, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Garci­a-Marco, Teresa & Robles-Fernández, M. Dolores, 2008. "Risk-taking behaviour and ownership in the banking industry: The Spanish evidence," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 332-354.
    16. Willman, Paul & Fenton-O'Creevy, Mark & Nicholson, Nigel & Soane, Emma, 2002. "Traders, managers and loss aversion in investment banking: a field study," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(1-2), pages 85-98.
    17. Thakor, Anjan V., 1996. "Financial conglomeration: Issues and questions," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 135-145.
    18. Hughes, Joseph P. & Mester, Loretta J. & Moon, Choon-Geol, 2001. "Are scale economies in banking elusive or illusive?: Evidence obtained by incorporating capital structure and risk-taking into models of bank production," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(12), pages 2169-2208, December.
    19. Lammertjan Dam & Michael Koetter, 2011. "Bank bailouts, interventions, and moral hazard," Proceedings 1131, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    20. Gropp, Reint E. & Köhler, Matthias, 2010. "Bank owners or bank managers: who is keen on risk? Evidence from the financial crisis," ZEW Discussion Papers 10-013, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G13 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Contingent Pricing; Futures Pricing
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages

    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:wop:pennin:95-07. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fiupaus.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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fiupaus.html .

    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.