IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finana/v95y2024ipas1057521924002837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

FinTech, systemic risk and bank market power – Australian perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Saklain, Md Sohel

Abstract

This study investigates idiosyncratic/firm-specific risk and systemic risk of FinTech firms and traditional financial institutions (FIs) in Australia. It also examines the impact of FinTech growth on bank market power. I find that stock return and idiosyncratic risk are higher in FinTech firms than in traditional FIs. Regarding systemic risk, FinTech firms are more exposed/vulnerable to systemic shocks than traditional FIs. However, they do not contribute to higher systemic risk as compared to traditional FIs. There is no substantial evidence that bank market power (captured by Lerner index) reduces due to the growth of FinTech firms. Yet, there is partial evidence that some accounting performances of banks may decline due to the growth of FinTech firms. Since FinTech firms are highly exposed/vulnerable to systemic shock, regulators should continue monitoring FinTech development closely and ensure that investors are aware of the risk and retail consumers of these firms are well protected.

Suggested Citation

  • Saklain, Md Sohel, 2024. "FinTech, systemic risk and bank market power – Australian perspective," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 95(PA).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:finana:v:95:y:2024:i:pa:s1057521924002837
    DOI: 10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1057521924002837
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103351?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:finana:v:95:y:2024:i:pa:s1057521924002837. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620166 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.