Abstract
In this paper we compare two standard extensions to the New Keynesian model featuring financial frictions. The first model, originating from Kiyotaki and Moore (1997), is based on collateral constraints. The second, developed by Carlstrom and Fuerst (1997) and Bernanke et al. (1999), accentuates the role of external finance premia. Our goal is to compare the workings of the two setups. Towards this end, we tweak the models and calibrate them in a way that allows for both qualitative and quantitative comparisons. Next, we make a thorough analysis of the two frameworks using moment matching, impulse response analysis and business cycle accounting. Overall, we find that the business cycle properties of the external finance premium framework are more in line with empirical evidence. In particular, the collateral constraint model fails to generate hump-shaped impulse responses and, for some important variables, shows moments that are inconsistent with the data by a large margin.
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.
