IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/ohidic/2014-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Were There Fire Sales in the RMBS Market?

Author

Listed:
  • Merrill, Craig B.

    (Brigham Young Unviersity and Wharton Financial Institutions Center, University of PA)

  • Nadauld, Taylor

    (Brigham Young University)

  • Stulz, Rene M.

    (OH State University and ECGI, Brussels)

  • Sherlund, Shane M.

    (Federal Reserve Board)

Abstract

Many observers have argued that the fall in RMBS prices during the crisis was partly caused by fire sales. We provide an explanation for why financial institutions may have engaged in fire sales using a unique dataset of RMBS transactions for insurance companies. We show that risk-sensitive capital requirements and mark-to-market accounting can jointly create incentives for capital-constrained financial institutions to engage in fire sales of stressed securities because the increased risk can make it too expensive to hold such securities. Further, we find that, in general, RMBS prices behaved as would be expected in the presence of fire sales.

Suggested Citation

  • Merrill, Craig B. & Nadauld, Taylor & Stulz, Rene M. & Sherlund, Shane M., 2014. "Were There Fire Sales in the RMBS Market?," Working Paper Series 2014-09, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecl:ohidic:2014-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2436887
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chia‐Chun Chiang & Greg Niehaus, 2020. "Correlated Trading by Life Insurers and Its Impact on Bond Prices," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(3), pages 597-625, September.
    2. Yann Braouezec & Lakshithe Wagalath, 2018. "Risk-Based Capital Requirements and Optimal Liquidation in a Stress Scenario [Testing macroprudential stress tests: the risk of regulatory risk weights]," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 22(2), pages 747-782.
    3. Sergey Chernenko & Samuel G. Hanson & Adi Sunderam, 2014. "The Rise and Fall of Demand for Securitizations," NBER Working Papers 20777, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Adelino, Manuel & Scott Frame, W. & Gerardi, Kristopher, 2017. "The effect of large investors on asset quality: Evidence from subprime mortgage securities," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 34-51.
    5. Hryckiewicz, Aneta & Kozlowski, Lukasz, 2018. "The consequences of liquidity imbalance: When net lenders leave interbank markets," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 82-97.
    6. Bo Becker & Marcus M Opp & Farzad Saidi, 2022. "Regulatory Forbearance in the U.S. Insurance Industry: The Effects of Removing Capital Requirements for an Asset Class," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(12), pages 5438-5482.
    7. Nicholas Garvin, 2019. "Emergency Liquidity Injections," RBA Research Discussion Papers rdp2019-10, Reserve Bank of Australia.
    8. Laux, Christian, 2016. "The economic consequences of extending the use of fair value accounting in regulatory capital calculations: A discussion," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 204-208.
    9. Focarelli, Dario, 2017. "Why Insurance Regulation is Crucial for Long-term Investment and Economic Growth," LEAP Working Papers 2017/1, Luiss Institute for European Analysis and Policy.
    10. Bijlsma, Melle & Vermeulen, Robert, 2016. "Insurance companies’ trading behaviour during the European sovereign debt crisis: Flight home or flight to quality?," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 137-154.
    11. Hałaj, Grzegorz, 2018. "System-wide implications of funding risk," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 503(C), pages 1151-1181.
    12. Becker, Bo & Opp, Marcus & Saidi, Farzad, 2020. "Regulatory Forbearance in the U.S. Insurance Industry: The Effects of Eliminating Capital Requirements," CEPR Discussion Papers 14373, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Ge, Shan & Weisbach, Michael S., 2021. "The role of financial conditions in portfolio choices: The case of insurers," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(2), pages 803-830.
    14. Krüger, Ulrich & Roling, Christoph & Silbermann, Leonid & Wong, Lui Hsian, 2022. "Banks' strategic interaction, adverse price dynamics and systemic liquidity risk," Discussion Papers 06/2022, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    15. Viral V. Acharya & Stephen G. Ryan, 2016. "Banks’ Financial Reporting and Financial System Stability," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 277-340, May.
    16. Dinc, Serdar & Erel, Isil & Liao, Rose, 2017. "Fire sale discount: Evidence from the sale of minority equity stakes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(3), pages 475-490.
    17. Anna Paulson & Richard Rosen, 2016. "The Life Insurance Industry and Systemic Risk: A Bond Market Perspective," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 155-174, October.
    18. Hałaj, Grzegorz, 2018. "Agent-based model of system-wide implications of funding risk," Working Paper Series 2121, European Central Bank.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G01 - Financial Economics - - General - - - Financial Crises
    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages
    • G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies
    • G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ecl:ohidic:2014-09. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdohsus.html .

    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.