IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedgfe/2024-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the Common Ownership Hypothesis in the US Banking Industry

Author

Abstract

The common ownership hypothesis (COH) states that firms with common shareholders, primarily large asset managers, compete less aggressively with each other. The U.S. banking industry is well suited to assess the common ownership hypothesis, because thousands of private banks without common ownership (CO) compete with hundreds of public banks with high and increasing levels of CO. This paper assesses the COH in the banking industry using more comprehensive ownership data than previous studies. In simple comparisons of raw deposit rate averages we document that the deposit rates of public banks are similar in markets where they share common shareholders with their rival and in markets where they do not. Panel regressions of deposit rates on the profit weights implied by the COH are generally not consistent with the COH if bank-quarter FEs are included. These estimates are “precise zeros” with 95% CIs suggesting that the threefold rise in CO among public banks between 2005 and 2022 moved their deposit rates by less than a quarter of a basis point in either direction. To assess the COH along non-price dimensions we also estimate the effect of CO on deposit quantities, and find that the estimates are also not consistent with the COH.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob P. Gramlich & Serafin J. Grundl, 2024. "Assessing the Common Ownership Hypothesis in the US Banking Industry," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2024-022r1, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), revised 12 Jul 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedgfe:2024-22
    DOI: 10.17016/FEDS.2024.022r1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2024022r1pap.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17016/FEDS.2024.022r1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. José Azar & Martin C. Schmalz & Isabel Tecu, 2018. "Anticompetitive Effects of Common Ownership," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1513-1565, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haerang Park, 2021. "Testing for Pricing Behavior in the Mortgage Loan Market," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 35(3), pages 270-293, September.
    2. Emmanuel Petrakis & Panagiotis Skartados, 2022. "Vertical Opportunism, Bargaining, and Share-Based Agreements," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 60(4), pages 549-565, June.
    3. Nadav Levy, 2024. "Partial ownership, control, and investment in vertical relationships," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 247-266, January.
    4. Hariskos, W. & Königstein, M. & Papadopoulos, K.G., 2022. "Anti-competitive effects of partial cross-ownership: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 399-409.
    5. Dasgupta, Amil & Fos, Vyacheslav & Sautner, Zacharias, 2021. "Institutional investors and corporate governance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112114, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Guglielmo Barone & Fabiano Schivardi & Enrico Sette, 2020. "Interlocking Directorates and Competition in Banking," EIEF Working Papers Series 2011, Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance (EIEF), revised May 2020.
    7. Xu, Tianli & Xu, Longbing & Zhu, Siyuan, 2023. "Common ownership and executive pay-for-performance sensitivity: Evidence from China," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    8. Chen, Shenglan & Ma, Hui & Wu, Qiang & Zhang, Hao, 2023. "Does common ownership constrain managerial rent extraction? Evidence from insider trading profitability," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    9. Yusen Dong & Senhua Chen & Yixue Wu, 2023. "Keeping up with the Joneses: The role of investee peers corporate environmental responsibility," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(4), pages 1841-1855, July.
    10. Lewellen, Katharina & Lowry, Michelle, 2021. "Does common ownership really increase firm coordination?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 322-344.
    11. Yi Jiang & Tingting Que & Miaomiao Yu, 2022. "Price asymmetries in the US airline industry," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 57(4), pages 793-814, November.
    12. Matthieu Bouvard & Adolfo de Motta, 2021. "Labor leverage, coordination failures, and aggregate risk," Post-Print hal-03524121, HAL.
    13. Gibbon, Alexandra J. & Schain, Jan Philip, 2023. "Rising markups, common ownership, and technological capacities," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    14. Shy, Oz & Stenbacka, Rune, 2019. "An OLG model of common ownership: Effects on consumption and investments," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    15. Brito, Duarte & Ribeiro, Ricardo & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2018. "Quantifying the coordinated effects of partial horizontal acquisitions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 108-149.
    16. Steven C. Salop & Fiona Scott Morton, 2021. "The 2010 HMGs Ten Years Later: Where Do We Go From Here?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 58(1), pages 81-101, February.
    17. Siotis, Georges & Ornaghi, Carmine & Castanheira, Micael, 2019. "Market Definition and Competition Policy Enforcement in the Pharmaceutical Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 14035, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Hamza Nizar & Taher Hamza & Faten Lakhal, 2024. "How does institutional cross‐ownership affect firm productivity? The importance of the corporate social responsibility channel," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 1988-2010, April.
    19. Taylan Mavruk & Conny Overland & Stefan Sjögren, 2020. "Keeping it real or keeping it simple? Ownership concentration measures compared," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 26(4), pages 958-1005, September.
    20. Hennig, Jan C. & Oehmichen, Jana & Steinberg, Philip J. & Heigermoser, Judith, 2022. "Determinants of common ownership: Exploring an information-based and a competition-based perspective in a global context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 690-702.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bank competition; Common ownership;

    JEL classification:

    • G21 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Banks; Other Depository Institutions; Micro Finance Institutions; Mortgages
    • G34 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Mergers; Acquisitions; Restructuring; Corporate Governance
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • L20 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - General
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    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:fip:fedgfe:2024-22. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Ryan Wolfslayer ; Keisha Fournillier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbgvus.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.