ریسک نقدینگی و تخصیص نمونه کارها بانکی

The joint existence of a lender of last resort and of a stock market is usually considered the sign of a developed financial infrastructure. This paper analyzes whether a securities market may play a role similar to that of a lender of last resort by being of assistance to a bank, which faces possible liquidity shortages. We examine which of these two institutions best prevents a bank's liquidity shortages while allowing the optimal allocation of the bank's resources. Our results suggest that securities markets matter more for the liquidity of banks than a lender of last resort.

The joint existence of a lender of last resort (LLR) and of a stock market is usually considered the sign of a developed financial infrastructure.1 A LLR provides solvent banks with a means to overcome temporary liquidity shortages while ensuring the stability of the banking system.2 Stock markets provide liquidity to investors whose risk and costs are therefore reduced. Furthermore, by vying for investors' capital, stock markets increase competition for banks. However, stock markets and banks may also complement each other. For instance, the former benefits from the underwriting services provided by the latter to issuers of stocks.

This paper shows how the level of development of securities markets affects the banks' optimal allocation. It influences the level of liquidity of their asset allocation, as well as the amount of long-term loans they are willing grant. Banks are notably shown to have more incentives to engage in long-term lending as securities markets become more liquid. The existence of a LLR in the absence of a securities market only leads to a higher amount of long-term lending if the return on loans is sufficiently high. It also appears that, the higher the cost of borrowing from the LLR is, the lower the level of long-term lending. Besides, when both a LLR and a securities market exist, the level of loans is higher than when a securities market exists alone.