Surprised or Not Surprised? The investors' reaction to the Comprehensive Assessment preceding the launch of the Banking Union
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Standard Standard
In: Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 74, 01.2017, p. 122-132.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
HarvardHarvard
APA
CBE
MLA
VancouverVancouver
Author
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Surprised or Not Surprised?
T2 - The investors' reaction to the Comprehensive Assessment preceding the launch of the Banking Union
AU - Carboni, Marika
AU - Fiordelisi, Franco
AU - Ricci, Ornella
AU - Stentella Lopes, Francesco
PY - 2017/1
Y1 - 2017/1
N2 - Did the Comprehensive Assessment (CA), preceding the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) launch in Europe, achieve its aims of producing new valuable information for the market? We show that the CA achieved the goal of increasing transparency: investors were able to detect weak banks at the announcement of the procedure (23rd October 2013), but gained full information on the amount of the capital shortfall only at the disclosure of the results (26th October 2014). Furthermore, at the official launch of the SSM (4th November 2014), banks under direct European Central Bank (ECB) supervision registered a more negative market reaction with respect to banks maintaining their national supervisors. Using a regression model including possible confounders and allowing for treatment effect heterogeneity, this negative reaction is confirmed. These findings suggest that, at least in the short run, investors penalized banks subject to direct ECB supervision, probably because of the fear of regulatory inconsistencies
AB - Did the Comprehensive Assessment (CA), preceding the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) launch in Europe, achieve its aims of producing new valuable information for the market? We show that the CA achieved the goal of increasing transparency: investors were able to detect weak banks at the announcement of the procedure (23rd October 2013), but gained full information on the amount of the capital shortfall only at the disclosure of the results (26th October 2014). Furthermore, at the official launch of the SSM (4th November 2014), banks under direct European Central Bank (ECB) supervision registered a more negative market reaction with respect to banks maintaining their national supervisors. Using a regression model including possible confounders and allowing for treatment effect heterogeneity, this negative reaction is confirmed. These findings suggest that, at least in the short run, investors penalized banks subject to direct ECB supervision, probably because of the fear of regulatory inconsistencies
KW - Banking
KW - Supervision
KW - Regulation
KW - Lending
KW - Risk-taking
U2 - 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.11.004
DO - 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2016.11.004
M3 - Article
VL - 74
SP - 122
EP - 132
JO - Journal of Banking and Finance
JF - Journal of Banking and Finance
SN - 0378-4266
ER -