Is the traditional banking model a survivor?

Vincenzo Chiorazzo, Vincenzo D'Apice, Robert DeYoung and Pierluigi Morelli

Journal of Banking & Finance, 2018, vol. 97, issue C, 238-256

Abstract: We test whether small US commercial banks that use a traditional business model are more likely to survive than nontraditional banks during both good and bad economic climates. Our concept of bank survival is derived from Stigler (1958) and includes any bank that does not fail or is not acquired. We define traditional banking by four hallmark characteristics: relationship loans, core deposit funding, revenue streams from traditional banking services, and physical bank branches. Banks that adhered more closely to this business strategy were an estimated 8 to 13 percentage points more likely to survive from 1997 to 2012 compared to other small banks using less traditional business strategies. This survival advantage approximately doubled during the financial crisis period.

Keywords: Bank business model; Financial crisis; Survivorship (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: G01 G21 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378426618302322
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:jbfina:v:97:y:2018:i:c:p:238-256

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.10.008

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Banking & Finance is currently edited by Ike Mathur

More articles in Journal of Banking & Finance from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().