Contributions in Merlin

null

null

Financial networks have shown to be important in understanding systemic events in credit markets. In this paper, we investigate how the structure of those networks can affect the capacity of regulators to assess the level of systemic risk. We introduce a model to compute the individual and systemic probability of default in a system of banks connected in a generic network of credit contracts and exposed to external shocks with a generic correlation structure. Even in the presence of complete knowledge, we identify conditions on the network for the emergence of multiple equilibria. Multiple equilibria give rise to uncertainty in the determination of the default probability. We show how this uncertainty can affect the estimation of systemic risk in terms of expected losses. We further quantify the effects of cyclicality, leverage, volatility and correlations. Our results are relevant to the current policy discussions on new regulatory framework to deal with systemic events of distress as well as on the desirable level of regulatory data disclosure.

Wealth management constitutes an important aspect of today's banking world, but very little is known about what explains the differences among banks in their ability to attract new assets under management. Using a unique panel database of Swiss private banks, we test the hypothesis that the performance of a bank in attracting new money depends on two input factors: skill and reputation. Relatively skilled banks -- that is, banks that are more cost-efficient than predicted by their input factors -- also perform better in attracting net new money. We also find that negative media coverage (such as in the context of fraudulent business practices related to tax evasion) strongly diminishes the future ability to attract assets under management, especially at small banks. The present value of lost profits is 3.35 (0.73) times the median annual net profit of a small (large) bank. Thus, adding to the explicit fines that many Swiss banks had to pay in the course of the U.S. Department of Justice's investigations, there are substantial implicit and reputational costs to banks of having negative media coverage. Investment performance for clients seems not to explain future net new money growth. In sum, these results underscore the importance of trust in money management.

In this paper, a new technique for pricing of European and American Parisian options, that we call the québécoisation method, is developed. We study the pricing of Parisian options in a hyper-exponential jump-diffusion model using the double Laplace-Carson transform with respect to the time to maturity and the residual Parisian time (time to expiration of the Parisian window) of the system of two partial integro-differential equations describing the option price dynamics. The transformed, i.e., québécoised, option price and hedging parameters delta and gamma are computed in a closed form, and the final results are obtained via the two-dimensional Gaver-Stehfest inversion algorithm. Our pricing method is analytically tractable, and it provides important economic insights for pricing and hedging of European and American Parisian options in the presence of jumps.

null

null

When not every facet of a transaction can be contracted upon and transacting parties' payoffs are asymmetric, low-powered incentives for those facets of the transaction that can be contracted upon may be necessary to avoid too large a distortion in those facets that cannot be contracted upon (Barzel, 1982, 1997; Hansmann, 1996; Holmstrom and Milgrom, 1991). Distinguishing between different types of capital (financial, physical, intangible), different forms of incentives (performance pay, organizational form, ownership), and different transacting pairs (manager/shareholder, supplier/buyer, customer/firm), and using a model of investment developed by Falkinger (2014), we extend the preceding insight to explain partnerships, mutuals, cooperatives, government ownership, and vertical integration. Distinguishing between resource allocation and resource creation, we show that resource creation calls for higher powered incentives than does resource allocation. Allowing for diversification-induced economies of scale in the use of capital, we establish the result that larger, more diversified firms offer higher-powered incentives. Finally, allowing for the partial contractibility of investment and the use of capital, we show that the former decreases the power of incentives whereas the latter increases that power, thereby providing a combined explanation for the Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century rise of large military and civilian bureaucracies and the more recent outsourcing of products and services previously sourced internally. Our results suggest that the recognition of the multiple facets of most transactions can help explain numerous institutional arrangements, as well as the apparent lack of disadvantage of low-powered-incentives organizations competing with their high-powered-incentives counterparts (Bohren and Josefsen, 2013; Hansmann and Thomsen, 2012).