Substitutes versus complements among credit risk management tools

Matthew Sackett and Sherrill Shaffer

Applied Financial Economics, 2006, vol. 16, issue 14, 1007-1017

Abstract: Practitioners, regulators and researchers have long recognized important conceptual distinctions among screening, monitoring and collection of loans. However, virtually no empirical studies have explored whether these tools of risk management are employed as net substitutes or as net complements. This paper finds evidence that, across the US banking industry, screening and monitoring behave as net substitutes but collection is complementary to screening and monitoring. A subset of low-risk banks suggests that best practices may involve net substitutability between each pair of these tools and, further, that any weakness in screening is fully offset by strength in monitoring and vice versa.

Date: 2006
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09603100600841878 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:apfiec:v:16:y:2006:i:14:p:1007-1017

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAFE20

DOI: 10.1080/09603100600841878

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Financial Economics is currently edited by Anita Phillips

More articles in Applied Financial Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().