Bank capital and liquidity creation: Evidence from the Russian experience

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the interrelationship between liquidity creation (LC) and bank capital in Vietnamese banking between 2007 and 2015. Design/methodology/approach A three-step procedure is used to measure LC. Thereafter, a simultaneous equations model with a three-stage least squares estimator is employed to examine the links between LC and bank capital. Findings The findings show that large banks mainly contributed a strong growth in LC in Vietnam between 2007 and 2015. The findings also indicate that off-balance sheet activities only played a small role in LC. In addition, the findings indicate a negative two-way relationship between LC and bank capital in Vietnam. The results of the robust checks reinforce the main findings. Practical implications The evidence shows that the implementation of Basel III may reduce LC and greater LC may increase banks’ insolvency. Consequently, this trade-off between the benefits of financial stability induced by tightening capital requirements and those of enhanced LC has important implications for Vietnamese authorities in strengthening the banking system. Originality/value This study is the first attempt to investigate the interrelationship between LC and bank capital in Vietnam, in which fat liquidity creation and non-fat liquidity creation are used and alternative measures of LC are also employed to provide robustness to the main findings.

PurposeThis study investigates the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation and further examines the effect that institutional quality has on this relationship in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).Design/methodology/approachThe data comprise 41 universal banks in nine SSA countries from 2010 to 2022. The study employs the two-step system generalized methods of moments and further uses alternative estimators such as the fixed-effect and two-stage least squares methods.FindingsThe empirical results show that bank capital has a direct positive and significant effect on liquidity creation. In addition, the positive effect of bank capital on liquidity creation is enhanced, particularly in a strong institutional environment. The results imply that nonconstraining capital regulatory policies bolster bank solvency, improve risk-absorption capacity and increase liquidity creation.Practical implicationsThis study has several policy implications. First, it provides empirical evidence on the position of banks in SSA on the financial fragility and risk-absorption hypothesis of bank capital and liquidity creation debates. This study shows that the effect of bank capital on liquidity creation in SSA countries is positive and supports the risk-absorption hypothesis. Second, this study highlights that a country's quality institutions can complement bank capital to increase liquidity creation. In addition, this study highlights that nonconstraining capital regulatory policies will bolster bank solvency, improve risk-absorption capacity and increase liquidity creation.Originality/valueThe novelty of this study is that it introduces the country's quality institutional environment into bank capital and liquidity creation links for the first time in SSA.

PurposeThis study analyzes the impact of changes in bank capital on liquidity creation. More specifically, it tests “financial fragility – crowding out” and “risk absorption” hypotheses for Indian banks.Design/methodology/approachIt uses the data of 136 listed and unlisted banks, ranging from the year 2000 to 2014. The analysis is based on panel data techniques.FindingsThere is negative relationship between narrow measure of bank liquidity creation and capital. Therefore, in the case of India, “financial fragility – crowding out” hypothesis holds for “cat nonfat” measure of liquidity creation. However, there is no relationship between “cat fat” measure of liquidity creation and capital, except for listed banks, and the banks in the pre-crisis period. In these two cases, “risk absorption” hypothesis holds. Furthermore, none of the hypotheses holds in the post-crisis period.Practical implicationsThe higher capital requirements posed by the Basel III will result in lower on-balance-sheet liquidity creation, which may result in lower profitability for the banks. However, increase in capital does not affect off-balance-sheet liquidity creation, rather enhances it in case of listed banks. So, the managers may use risky off-balance-sheet liquidity creation to improve profitability. Therefore, the regulators must be vigilant to the off-balance-sheet activities of banks to avoid banking turmoil.Originality/valueTo the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore which hypothesis regarding the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation holds for Indian banks. It contributes to the existing literature by providing the empirical evidence that “financial fragility – crowding out” hypothesis holds for on-balance-sheet liquidity creation and “risk absorption” hypothesis holds for listed banks. It also points to the new direction that neither of the hypotheses holds in the post-crisis period in India.

Bank Capital, Liquidity Creation and Deposit Insurance

We examine the relation between capital and liquidity creation. This issue is interesting because of the potential impact on liquidity creation from tighter capital requirements such as those in Basel III. We perform Granger-causality tests in a dynamic GMM panel estimator framework on an exhaustive data set of Czech banks, which mainly includes small banks from 2000 to 2010. We observe a strong expansion in liquidity creation until the financial crisis that was mainly driven by large banks. We show that capital negatively Granger-causes liquidity creation in this industry, where majority of banks are small. But we also observe that liquidity creation Granger-causes a reduction in capital. These findings support the view that Basel III can reduce liquidity creation, but also that greater liquidity creation can reduce banks’ solvency. Thus, we show that this reverse causality generates a trade-off between the benefits of financial stability induced by stronger capital requirements and the benefits of increased liquidity creation.

Bank Capital and Liquidity Creation: Granger-Causality Evidence

Employing a descriptive approach, this study intends to investigate the causal relationship between financial stability and liquidity creation and the effects of foreign ownership, local ownership, and financial stability on liquidity creation. The research sample included 35 banks listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange based on a purposive sampling technique (non-random sampling) and the observation period between 2013 and 2020 utilizing quarterly data. According to the Granger causality test results, there is no reciprocal relationship between the creation of liquidity and financial stability. This indicates that the research variables avoid endogeneity problems. Using static panel data analysis, we discovered that neither foreign ownership nor financial stability has any impact on the creation of bank liquidity; however, the interaction between foreign ownership and financial stability has a significant positive impact, suggesting that the interaction between the two could become stronger. The asset-side liquidity creation component is the only one that plays this role. Domestic ownership favors liquidity creation, but there is less of an effect when ownership and financial stability are combined. When the creation of liquidity increases, production activities increase, suggesting that economic activity increases. Thus, these findings are useful for regulators and central banks in making economic and banking policies by considering bank ownership and stability.

New evidence on liquidity creation and bank capital: The roles of liquidity and political risk

This paper aims to evaluate the relationship between capital and liquidity creation following the implementation of the Basel III rules. These regulatory measures target both increased capital ratios and a reduction of banks’ maturity transformation risk, which could result in excessive constraints on bank liquidity creation, thereby negatively affecting economic growth. Using a simultaneous equation model, we find a bi-causal negative relationship, which suggests that banks may reduce liquidity creation as capital increases; and when liquidity creation increases, banks reduce capital ratios. Our results therefore imply a trade-off between financial stability (higher capital, reduced risk) and economic growth (liquidity creation).

This paper examines how the introduction of deposit insurance influences the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation. As discussed by Berger and Bouwman (2009), there are two competing hypotheses on this relationship which can be influenced by the presence of deposit insurance. The introduction of a deposit insurance scheme in an emerging market, Russia, provides a natural experiment to investigate this issue. We study three alternative measures of bank liquidity creation and perform estimations on a large set of Russian banks. Our findings suggest that the introduction of the deposit insurance scheme exerts a limited impact on the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation and does not change the negative sign of the relationship. The implication is that better capitalized banks tend to create less liquidity, which supports the “financial fragility/crowding-out” hypothesis. This conclusion has important policy implications for emerging countries as it suggests that bank capital requirements implemented to support financial stability may harm liquidity creation.

A bank is the prototypical financial institution; there are notable outward differences between the wealth invested by owners of financial institutions and that of other industries. The capital of a financial institution consists largely of financial assets and only to a small degree of the physical plant and equipment usually associated with capital in other industries. Moreover, these physical differences are associated with important functional differences. A financial institution, like any other firm, faces the problem of combining the inputs which it purchases to produce the outputs which it sells. In banking, the most important inputs are labor and deposits, and they produce liquidity services, brokerage services, accounting and information services, and the like. In this production process, bank capital has two roles: (1) It cooperates directly with the other inputs in the production of bank services, and (2) it is used to attract the deposit input by providing insurance to depositors against a decline in the value of a bank's assets; the more capital a bank has, the more the value of its assets can fall before depositors incur losses. The difference between banking (and financial institutions in general) and most other industries is in the relative importance of these two roles. The equity capital of any firm serves, in part, to guarantee the value of the firm's fixed obligations, but that function is usually subordinate to the provision of assets to the firm. However, in banking, equity capital (and equity is the form that almost all nondeposit ownership interest in bank assets has taken) typically accounts for only about a tenth of total bank resources, and most of the returns to equity capital derive from its insurance function. Bank owners invest capital primarily to attract deposits, which are then used to buy assets, and only secondarily to buy assets directly. Apart from these novel economic aspects, a study of investment in banking provides the opportunity to study the effects of government

This study investigates the interrelationship between bank capital and liquidity creation in the Indian banking sector. The sample considers 68 commercial banks (public, private and foreign banks) operating in India during the period from 1996–1997 to 2013–2014. We employ the generalised method of moments technique in a Granger causality framework and find a bidirectional relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation for the entire sample. Our results support the financial fragility–crowding-out hypothesis, which suggests that Indian banks follow a fragile financial structure to maximise liquidity creation and increase their capital ratio by crowding out deposits to limit liquidity creation. Our results also support the liquidity substitution hypothesis, which suggests that stable liabilities can be substituted for bank capital, while facing more risk. We find similar results with the whole sample regardless of ownership, size, capitalisation and periods. These findings have implications for bank managers and policymakers on formulating appropriate policy for capital and liquidity creation of commercial banks in India. JEL Codes: G20, G21, G33

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of bank capital on liquidity creation. Especially, the authors test two competing hypotheses: the “risk absorption” hypothesis and the “financial fragility-crowding out” hypothesis that describe such association in the context of UK and French banking industry. Design/methodology/approach The authors use data collected from Bankscope for commercial banks pertaining to the aforementioned countries. The sample period ranges from 2000 to 2014. Liquidity creation was measured using a novel approach proposed by Berger and Bouwman (2007). This study uses the quantile regression (QR) and the instrumental variables QR, along with classical ordinary least squares (OLS) and panel regression, to deal with the mixed results reported by previous papers. Findings Using OLS and panel regression, the authors first find that bank capital negatively affects liquidity creation which supports risk absorption hypothesis. Second, the result from QR confirms the negative association between the aforementioned variables and shows that the effect is homogenous across quantiles of liquidity creation distribution. The result remains unchanged when using the QR with instrumental variables to address the potential problem of endogeneity. Originality/value This paper sheds more lights on the relationship between bank capital and liquidity creation by using a novel estimation approach based on the QR methodology.

Bank Capital, Liquidity Creation and Deposit Insurance

Problems related to banking in Indonesia today is the problem of liquidity. It is shownfrom a commercial bank credit grew 23.03% but not matched by growth in depositswhich only reached 16.56% in 2012 (Report of Banking Supervision, 2012). Therefore,this study aims to determine the liquidity creation in Indonesia as well as to analyze theinfluence of bank capital, credit risk and income instability towards liquidity creation.The samples includes 10 major banks in Indonesia with total assets of more thanRp120billion in 2013. The reason for choosing this sample because of the 10 largestbanks reflects the state of the banks in Indonesia which accounted for 65.2% of totalassets, 65.6% of total loans, and 66% of total deposits or deposits in the banking industry(PEFINDO, 2014). The results of this research note that the bank's capital and earningsvolatility is significant negative effect on liquidity creation. While the credit risk of anegative but insignificant effect on liquidity creation. In the determination coefficient testshowed that 43.6% dependent variable is the liquidity creation can be explained by theindependent variable is the capital of banks, credit risk and earnings volatility. While56.4% is explained by other variables outside the model of this study.Keywords: liquidity creation, capital of banks, credit risk, third-party funds, banks inIndonesia.