IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/7956071.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring the systemic importance of Chinese banks: a comparison of different risk measurement models

Author

Listed:
  • Chunlin Cai

Abstract

We use the risk measurement models DebtRank, â–³CoVaR and marginal expected shortfall to measure systemic risk and compare their performance in measuring the systemic importance of banks. Our results show that the different risk measurement models yield significant differences in the systemic risk. The systemic risk measured by DebtRank and marginal expected shortfall shows monotonicity with the bank type, while that measured by â–³CoVaR does not. The systemic risk of different types of banks changes dynamically in different years. The systemic risk measured by DebtRank is positively correlated with both size and centrality, and of the three models, DebtRank performs best at measuring the systemic importance of banks from the perspectives of size and interconnectedness. The results of this paper provide empirical evidence for reference to aid banking system supervision and the measurement of the systemic importance of banks.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:7956071
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2023-03/jrmv_Cai_web_final.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

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:journ5:7956071. 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-model-validation .

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.