Hedging securities and Silicon Valley Bank idiosyncrasies

Raymond Kim

Journal of Futures Markets, 2024, vol. 44, issue 4, 653-672

Abstract: Hedging requires adequacy and timing. This paper finds that banks did not systematically ignore balance‐sheet risks like Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), and instead exercised risk management by asymmetrically increasing hedging activity when security losses increase and scaling back hedging activity as security losses reverse. Banks also hedge against bank runs when risk increases due to a combination of security losses and funding risks from unsecured deposits. Findings suggest SVB's mistakes are idiosyncratic. Results suggest that nonstress test banks target balance‐sheet risks when hedging, stabilizing themselves from interest rate shocks transmitted through fixed‐income securities. Scrutiny of rules‐based outliers like SVB is preferable to increased regulatory burden for all nonstress test banks.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/fut.22486

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jfutmk:v:44:y:2024:i:4:p:653-672

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0270-7314

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Futures Markets is currently edited by Robert I. Webb

More articles in Journal of Futures Markets from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().