Abstract
PurposeThis paper sheds light on the impact of market risk measures on systemic risk. Market risk, which is captured by the volatility of stock market returns, is also decomposed into systematic and idiosyncratic risks.Design/methodology/approachThe author uses the five-factor asset pricing model and systemic risk methodologies to derive market and systemic risk measures, respectively. Using a sample of 2,667 US banks for over 30 years and employing panel data estimation techniques, the author tests the said relationship.FindingsIt is shown that idiosyncratic risk can surge systemic risk, while systematic risk plays a less important role. Results survive a battery of tests, including different systemic risk measures, controlling causality and interacting with bank size, market fear and crisis periods.Practical implicationsThese findings call for regulatory intervention, especially for large banks with high idiosyncratic risk.Originality/valueThis is the first paper that provides a more granular picture of the relationship between market and systemic risk from the US banking industry for more than 30 years.
Subject
General Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Reference33 articles.
1. On the ranking consistency of systemic risk measures: empirical evidence;The European Journal of Finance,2022
2. Measuring systemic risk;The Review of Financial Studies,2017
3. Liquidity policies and systemic risk;Journal of Financial Intermediation,2018
4. CoVaR;American Economic Review,2016
5. What is systemic risk?;Journal of Money, Credit and Banking,2013