The Growing Risk of Spillovers and Spillbacks in the Bank‑NBFI Nexus
![Decorative image: View of high rise glass building and dark steel in London](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/06/LSE_NBFI_3_cetorelli_460.jpg?w=920)
Nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs) are growing, but banks support that growth via funding and liquidity insurance. The transformation of activities and risks from banks to a bank-NBFI nexus may have benefits in normal states of the world, as it may result in overall growth in (especially, credit) markets and widen access to a wide range of financial services, but the system may be disproportionately exposed to financial and economic instability when aggregate tail risk materializes. In this post, we consider the systemic implications of the observed build-up of bank-NBFI connections associated with the growth of NBFIs.
Banks and Nonbanks Are Not Separate, but Interwoven
![Decorative image: View of high rise glass building and dark steel in London](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/06/LSE_NBFI_2_cetorelli_460.jpg?w=920)
In our previous post, we documented the significant growth of nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs) over the past decade, but also argued for and showed evidence of NBFIs’ dependence on banks for funding and liquidity support. In this post, we explain that the observed growth of NBFIs reflects banks optimally changing their business models in response to factors such as regulation, rather than banks stepping away from lending and risky activities and being substituted by NBFIs. The enduring bank-NBFI nexus is best understood as an ever-evolving transformation of risks that were hitherto with banks but are now being repackaged between banks and NBFIs.
Do Exchange‑Traded Products Improve Bitcoin Trading?
![Decorative photo: Close-up financial trading chart on digital LCD display of BTC bitcoin.](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/05/LSE_2024_bitcoin-ETF_sarkar_460.jpg?w=920)
Spot bitcoin exchange-traded products (ETPs) began trading in the U.S. on January 11, 2024. For investors, these ETPs purport improved liquidity and price efficiency, and more convenient access to bitcoin trading compared to other means of trading bitcoin in spot markets. Proponents also cite bitcoin holdings as a portfolio diversification opportunity due to historically low correlation with traditional financial securities. Others argue that bitcoin remains a speculative asset and that ETPs increase its interconnections with the traditional financial system. In this post, we examine the initial performance, trading costs, and price efficiency of spot bitcoin ETPs in the U.S.
Internal Liquidity’s Value in a Financial Crisis
![Decorative image of a drop of water hitting a pool of water with dollar bills under the water.](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/04/LSE_2024_internal-liquidity_copeland_460.jpg?w=920)
A classic question for U.S. financial firms is whether to organize themselves as entities that are affiliated with a bank-holding company (BHC). This affiliation brings benefits, such as access to liquidity from other affiliated entities, as well as costs, particularly a larger regulatory burden. This post highlights the results from a recent Staff Report that sheds light on this tradeoff. This work uses confidential data on the population of broker-dealers to study the benefits of being affiliated with a BHC, with a focus on the global financial crisis (GFC). The analysis reveals that affiliation with a BHC makes broker-dealers more resilient to the aggregate liquidity shocks that prevailed during the GFC. This results in these broker-dealers being more willing to hold riskier securities on their balance sheet relative to broker-dealers that are not affiliated with a BHC.
The Nonbank Shadow of Banks
![Decorative image: Aerial view of money transfer icon over cityscape](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/10/LSE_2023_nonbank-shadow_cetorelli_460.jpg?w=920)
Financial and technological innovation and changes in the macroeconomic environment have led to the growth of nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs), and to the possible displacement of banks in the provision of traditional financial intermediation services (deposit taking, loan making, and facilitation of payments). In this post, we look at the joint evolution of banks—referred to as depository institutions from here on—and nonbanks inside the organizational structure of bank holding companies (BHCs). Using a unique database of the organizational structure of all BHCs ever in existence since the 1970s, we document the evolution of NBFI activities within BHCs. Our evidence suggests that there exist important conglomeration synergies to having both banks and NBFIs under the same organizational umbrella.
2nd Annual International Roles of the U.S. Dollar Conference
![photo: three presenters of the US Dollar conference: left to right: Leonardo Elias Financial Research Economist Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Hyeyoon Jung Financial Research Economist Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Darrell Duffie Adams Distinguished Professor of Management and Professor of Finance at the Graduate School of Business, and professor by courtesy, Department of Economics Stanford University](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/06/LSE_2023_USD-conference_goldberg_460.jpg?w=920)
The U.S. dollar plays a central role in the global economy. In addition to being the most widely used currency in foreign exchange transactions, it represents the largest share in official reserves, international debt securities and loans, cross-border payments, and trade invoicing. The ubiquity of the U.S. dollar in global transactions reflects several key factors, including the depth and liquidity of U.S. capital markets, the size of the U.S. economy, the relatively low cost of converting dollars into other currencies, and an enduring confidence in the U.S. legal system and its institutions.
Monitoring Banks’ Exposure to Nonbanks: The Network of Interconnections Matters
![Decorative image: View of high rise glass building and dark steel in London](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/04/LSE_2023_nbfi-network_cetorelli_460.jpg?w=920)
The first post in this series discussed the potential exposure of banks to the open-end funds sector, by virtue of commonalities in asset holdings that expose banks to balance sheet losses in the event of an asset fire sale by these funds. In this post, we summarize the findings reported in a recent paper of ours, in which we expand the analysis to consider a broad cross section of non-bank financial institution (NBFI) segments. We unveil an innovative monitoring insight: the network of interconnections across NBFI segments and banks matters. For example, certain nonbank institutions may not have a meaningful asset overlap with banks, but their fire sales could nevertheless represent a vulnerability for banks because their assets overlap closely with other NBFIs that banks are substantially exposed to.
Enhancing Monitoring of NBFI Exposure: The Case of Open‑End Funds
![Decorative photo: High-rise glass buildings](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2023/03/LSE_2023_enhancing_cetorelli_460.jpg?w=920)
Non-bank financial institutions (NBFIs) have grown steadily over the last two decades, becoming important providers of financial intermediation services. As NBFIs naturally interact with banking institutions in many markets and provide a wide range of services, banks may develop significant direct exposures stemming from these counterparty relationships. However, banks may be also exposed to NBFIs indirectly, simply by virtue of commonality in asset holdings. This post and its companion piece focus on this indirect form of exposure and propose ways to identify and quantify such vulnerabilities.
The Fed’s Balance Sheet Runoff: The Role of Levered NBFIs and Households
![Photo: Finance and banking concept. Euro coins and us dollar banknote close-up. Abstract image of Financial system with selective focus, toned, double exposure.](https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2022/04/LSE_2022_balance-sheet-NFBI_cipriani_460.jpg?w=920)
In a Liberty Street Economics post that appeared yesterday, we described the mechanics of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet “runoff” when newly issued Treasury securities are purchased by banks and money market funds (MMFs). The same mechanics would largely hold true when mortgage-backed securities (MBS) are purchased by banks. In this post, we show what happens when newly issued Treasury securities are purchased by levered nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs)—such as hedge funds or nonbank dealers—and by households.