This paper compares the timeliness and accuracy of (confidential) government assessments of bank condition against market evaluations of large U.S. bank holding companies. We find that supervisors and bond rating agencies both acquire some information that would help the other group forecast changes in bank condition. In contrast, supervisory assessments and equity market indicators are not strongly interrelated. Furthermore, supervisory assessments are generally less accurate than either stock or bond market indicators in predicting future changes in performance, except when those assessments derive from a recent on-site inspection visit. To some extent, these findings seem consistent with the various parties' differing incentives.
Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Volume (Year): 32 (2000) Issue (Month): 3 (August) Pages: 641-67 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.) This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.