Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the relationship between balance sheet size and leverage (i.e., leverage pro-cyclicality) and the pro-cyclicality of systemic risk using three systemic risk measures such as ΔCoVaR (Adrian and Brunnermeier (2016)), MES (Acharya et al. (2017)), SRISK (Brownlees and Engle (2016)). We conduct an extensive panel data analysis using a sample of 264 Chinese listed financial institutions (43 commercial banks, 74 finance services and 147 real estate finance services) over 2005:4–2019:4. We also study the impact of different phases of the financial turmoil by considering three subperiods, the “Global Financial Crisis” (2007:1–2009:4), the “Monetary Policy Restriction” (2010:1–2014:4), and the “2015 Chinese Stock Crash” (2015:1–2019:4). We find that leverage pro-cyclicality mainly affects CBs, in particular during the global financial crisis and the monetary policy restriction. We also find that larger financial institutions increase systemic risk, in particular commercial banks, which from 2016 started increasing shadow banking activities, and the real estate financial services with their activity closer to commercial banking.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
