Author
Listed:
- Wei Chen and Jimmy Skoglund
Abstract
ABSTRACT The management of a liquid asset portfolio that can be used to generate counterbalancing capacity in liquidity distress is quickly emerging as a core function in banks. The new Basel III liquidity risk regulation underscores the importance in banks managing a liquidity contingency buffer. The focus is on maintaining a high quality liquidity portfolio that can efficiently hedge liquidity outflows under stress scenarios. That is, to generate sufficient counterbalancing capacity. Since holding standby counterbalancing capacity has an opportunity cost, the firm would like to hold the minimum-cost portfolio that suffices for hedging out the negative flows. While the simplest way to build a liquidity portfolio is to hold sufficient cash at hand, this is not optimal for a profit-seeking institution. In general, high liquidity assets, such as cash, are the most costly to hold but have a lower execution cost when needed to create liquidity. In this paper we propose two typically complementary methods of finding the optimal liquidity hedging portfolio that can generate enough counterbalancing capacity with a high probability. The first method is to acquire more assets, which can generate future cashflows that can complement the potential net cash outflows. This method can be referred to as hedging with contractual cashflows that naturally complement the term structure of liquidity. The method can also be used when the strategy for executing the liquidity hedging portfolio is predetermined. The second method for liquidity hedging is to leverage dynamic counterbalancing capacity through use of credit facilities, asset sales and repo in order to generate liquidity at the exact time when net contractual cashflow cannot balance by itself. The main contribution of this paper is to establish a sound quantitative liquidity hedging framework that unifies and makes possible the application of the two liquidity hedging approaches consistently in practice.
Suggested Citation
Handle:
RePEc:rsk:journ4:2328149
Download full text from publisher
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:rsk:journ4:2328149. 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: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-risk .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.