No abstract

Theoretical background: The global financial crisis (GFC) has shown the importance of the funding model for the bank’s stability. In this context, deposits were of particular importance as they proved to be a stable source of funding during market turmoil. As a result, many banks have changed the funding model, paying greater attention to financing obtained on the deposits market. Purpose of the article: In this paper, we analyze the impact of funding models on the EU banks’ risk after GFC, i.e. in 2011–2018. We put particular emphasis on the funding structure measured by the deposits to total assets ratio and changes that take place according to the type of institution (i.e. listing status, specialization, and funding model). Research methods: In our research, we use panel data models together with a set of tests that allow us to deduce about properties of proposed models and allow us to analyze the significance of the impact of the bank-specific, macroeconomic, and dummy variables on the bank’s risk. We apply “within”, “fixed time effects” estimator from plm R package. Main findings: We confirm the stabilizing function of deposits, but also the non-linear nature of the impact of the funding structure on the bank’s stability, depending on the bank’s specialization. This means that the stabilizing role of deposits for the bank’s stability is just as important in the post-crisis period as it was during the outbreak of GFC in 2008, although the excessive growth of deposits in some types of banks may, however, lead to an increase in the risk level.

In our paper, we analyse the impact of funding structure on banking sector stability in EU countries. Our findings show that after the global financial crisis (GFC) there are four main funding models in the EU banking sectors. We document that funding structure is an important factor influencing the banking sector stability. We report that there are also some other banking business model characteristics as well as macroeconomic indicators which have impact on banking sector risk.

StreszczenieGlobalny kryzys finansowy skutkował ograniczeniem możliwości wykorzystania rynku międzybankowego do krótkoterminowego zarządzania płynnością przez banki zarówno w Polsce, jak i w strefie euro. Na skutek spadku zaufania pomiędzy uczestnikami rynku obniżenie obrotów odnotowano przede wszystkim w segmencie lokat niezabezpieczonych. Dalszą konsekwencją był wzrost znaczenia depozytów jednodniowych w strukturze depozytów niezabezpieczonych zawieranych na rynku międzybankowym, jako efekt zwiększonej awersji banków do finansowania na dłuższe terminy zapadalności.Spadek znaczenia rynku lokat międzybankowych utrzymywał się także w okresie pokryzysowym. Przyczyn tej sytuacji upatrywać można nie tylko we wzroście ryzyka kredytowego, ale również w zmianach regulacyjno-prawnych oraz modyfikacji wykorzystywanych przez banki modeli finansowania działalności bankowej. Można ocenić, że po części za sytuację tę odpowiada także postawa banków centralnych, których priorytetem w okresie napięć na rynkach finansowych nie było wsparcie aktywności banków na rynku międzybankowym. W rezultacie zmiany, które zapoczątkowane zostały kryzysem zaufania pomiędzy uczestnikami rynku, okazały się długotrwałe w skutkach. Rynki niezabezpieczonych lokat międzybankowych, zarówno w Polsce, jak i strefie euro, nie odzyskały roli, jaką pełniły przed wybuchem globalnego kryzysu finansowego. The decrease in the importance of the interbank market as a source of banking liquidity management in post-crisis period with particular emphasis on the unsecured interbank deposits segment (Summary)The global financial crisis resulted in the limitation of using by banks the interbank market for short-term liquidity management in both Poland and the euro area. NAUKOWE Słowa kluczowe:rynek międzybankowy, lokaty niezabezpieczone, kryzys finansowy, bank centralny

In the article, we assess the impact of the regulatory framework on banks' funding models in the European Union in the period 2011–2018. We put particular emphasis on the capital requirements captured by two different types of regulatory measures: individual and sectoral. Moreover, we include a country‐level regulatory variable to assess if the overall lawmaking conditions impact banks' funding models. Our estimates indicate that after the Global Financial Crisis, all regulatory measures had a significant impact on the deposits to total assets ratio, which we assume to be the best proxy for banks' funding models. Having divided the sample of the EU banks into four subsamples according to their specialization (i.e. commercial, cooperative, savings, and investment banks), we identified significant differences in strength and direction of regulatory variables' impact on banks' funding model within selected subsamples. In particular, due to the specific nature of investment banks, prudential regulations contribute to a change in the funding model towards safer deposit funding. Moreover, our results indicate that in the case of the non‐euro area banking sector, the regulatory environment measured by the regulatory quality index has an adverse impact on the Deposits to total assets ratio in comparison with both the entire sample as well as the euro area banking sector.