Opzioni di ricerca
Home Media Facciamo chiarezza Studi e pubblicazioni Statistiche Politica monetaria L’euro Pagamenti e mercati Lavorare in BCE
Suggerimenti
Ordina per
Non disponibile in italiano

Jonas Wendelborn

27 May 2026
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2026
Details
Abstract
Corporate bankruptcies in the euro area have been on the rise, but the aggregate asset quality of banks’ corporate lending has remained broadly stable. This special feature analyses this divergence and its implications for financial stability. It shows that rising bankruptcies may partly be explained by the normalisation of firm turnover since the COVID-19 pandemic, albeit with marked cross-country unevenness. At the same time, firm-level evidence suggests that balance sheet and profitability challenges are concentrated in a vulnerable tail of firms, but have remained stable for the average euro area company. Structural changes in corporate financing, including a declining reliance on bank loans and a larger role for equity, debt securities and non-bank lending, imply that a greater share of corporate risk might be outside the banking system. The analysis also shows that broadly stable aggregate asset quality reflects diverging trends in loan performance across countries and firm sizes, as well as banks’ proactive management of non-performing loans. Overall, it does not find any systematic evidence for banks delaying the recognition of non-performing loans in their loan books. Instead, the analysis indicates that weaker firm fundamentals result in a higher probability of bank exposures being reclassified from performing to non-performing.
JEL Code
E32 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles→Business Fluctuations, Cycles
E44 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
G01 : Financial Economics→General→Financial Crises
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G32 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→Financing Policy, Financial Risk and Risk Management, Capital and Ownership Structure, Value of Firms, Goodwill
G33 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→Bankruptcy, Liquidation
27 May 2026
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2026
Details
Abstract
Financial stability communication is challenging because its task is not to forecast financial crises, let alone predict their precise timing. Rather, it is to identify vulnerabilities and explain how the financial system is likely to fare should it be confronted with adverse shocks. Great care is needed in this endeavour, because the sentiment of financial stability communication can influence market perceptions and risk assessments, as well as broader economic and financial outcomes. Given the presence of this potential feedback loop, the task of financial stability communication at the ECB has long been guided by a broad concept of financial stability: the smooth allocation of financial resources, effective management of risk by financial institutions and the capacity of the financial system to absorb shocks. Using the messages conveyed in the ECB’s Financial Stability Review over two decades, this special feature compares dictionary-based, FinBERT and prompt-based AI approaches to extracting financial stability sentiment. It finds broad co-movement across methods, while the GPT-based filter isolates sentences that contain explicit risk assessments, capturing subtle shifts in tone and context that were previously difficult to quantify. Used carefully, such tools can support risk monitoring and drafting consistency over time, but they remain complementary to expert judgement, vulnerability analysis and stress testing, rather than substitutes for it. A deep-dive box in the special feature also shows how AI can be used to systematically extract information from financial news to create an indicator for the severity and probability of triggers (SPOT) for financial stability risks.
JEL Code
E58 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Central Banks and Their Policies
G01 : Financial Economics→General→Financial Crises
C81 : Mathematical and Quantitative Methods→Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology, Computer Programs→Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data, Data Access
21 May 2025
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2025
Details
Abstract
In recent years, the intertwining of geopolitical tensions and cyber threats has become increasingly pronounced, with state-sponsored cyberattacks playing an increasingly important role in the perpetration of hybrid conflicts. This phenomenon is primarily driven by a small number of countries, often characterised as authoritarian, which use their cyber capabilities to further national interests. These cyberattacks frequently target critical infrastructures and state institutions, focusing predominantly on data theft, sabotage and influence campaigns. The threat of cyberattacks to financial stability is significant, given the growing digitalisation and interconnectedness within the financial system. Cyberattacks can disrupt essential financial services, posing systemic risks through operational, financial and confidence channels. Increasing dependency on third-party providers amplifies these vulnerabilities. In times of heightened geopolitical tension, the risk of cyberattacks aimed at causing maximum disruption is elevated. It is therefore imperative for authorities and financial institutions to prioritise cybersecurity, develop resilience and enhance cooperation to effectively mitigate such risks.
JEL Code
F51 : International Economics→International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy→International Conflicts, Negotiations, Sanctions
F52 : International Economics→International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy→National Security, Economic Nationalism
19 May 2025
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2025
Details
Abstract
Since 2023 the price of gold has reached record highs, underscoring its role as a safe haven during periods of financial and geopolitical stress. Unlike other assets, gold does not provide cash flow and carries no counterparty risk, making it appealing in uncertain times. Gold outperforms equities and bonds during crises, reaffirming its stabilising role in investors’ portfolios. Recent trends in gold futures markets highlight increased investor demand and a preference for physical delivery amid economic policy uncertainty and trade tensions. Euro area investors have exposure to gold through derivatives, with notable foreign counterparty risks, indicating potential vulnerabilities. Although aggregate exposure is limited, the concentrated and leveraged nature of commodity markets poses systemic risks. During extreme geopolitical or economic events, these risk factors could lead to liquidity stress and market disruptions, affecting financial stability. Gold markets thus reflect broader risk perceptions, with important implications for financial systems.
JEL Code
G11 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Portfolio Choice, Investment Decisions
G15 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→International Financial Markets
E44 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
F13 : International Economics→Trade→Trade Policy, International Trade Organizations
F30 : International Economics→International Finance→General
20 November 2024
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2024
Details
Abstract
This edition of the ECB’s Financial Stability Review (FSR) marks the 20th anniversary of its inaugural publication. The FSR was originally launched to help in preventing financial crises, and this special feature draws lessons from two decades of experience in identifying, analysing and communicating about systemic risks via this publication. Although risk analysis and risk communication are distinct processes, the special feature emphasises that they are inextricably intertwined in a seamless cycle where each informs and enhances the other. Effective risk identification is founded on the ability to combine structured, data-driven assessments with qualitative insights and expert judgement. Such an approach requires a comprehensive and adaptive framework that continuously integrates broad reviews of indicators with focused analyses on emerging risks. Early identification of vulnerabilities enables timely intervention, but the complex, non-linear way that the financial system functions means that flexibility remains essential. Clear and transparent communication of systemic risks supports this analytical process by shaping expectations and enhancing market discipline, creating a feedback loop that strengthens both policy response and risk awareness. However, central banks face the challenge of balancing communication frequency and depth in order to avoid false alarms while at the same time maintaining credibility. As the ECB’s FSR has evolved, it has sought to become more accessible and data-driven, while utilising diverse media channels to broaden its audience. Experience confirms that targeted, proactive communication reinforces financial stability by aligning policymakers and markets, underscoring the symbiotic relationship between risk analysis and effective communication in maintaining financial system resilience.
JEL Code
D81 : Microeconomics→Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty→Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
E58 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Central Banks and Their Policies
G01 : Financial Economics→General→Financial Crises
15 November 2022
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2022
Details
Abstract
Digitalisation is transforming the global economy, including by raising productivity and broadening consumer access to information. While these forces are facilitating greater competition, supporting economic growth and lowering prices, the benefits are not without risks – the flip side of digitalisation can be greater vulnerability to cyberattacks. For these to be a source of risk to financial stability, substitutability, risk correlation and interconnectedness are all key dimensions. A cyberattack on a critical infrastructure or an attack on one service that unearths vulnerabilities in another could quickly lead to system-wide stresses. Negative externalities arising from the effectiveness of financial institutions’ management of cyber risk could provide grounds for a public policy response. While the existing macroprudential policy toolkit has limited capacity to address cyber risks, their growing relevance nevertheless calls for macroprudential overseers to anticipate them, assess the capacity of the financial system to absorb them, and to issue risk warnings when warranted. In this vein, econometric evidence suggests that cyberattacks are not random, but are driven by factors such as economic strength, the degree of financial globalisation as well as policy and political uncertainty. This underscores how important it is for authorities to foster the sharing of information and the closing of data gaps on cyberattacks.
JEL Code
D43 : Microeconomics→Market Structure and Pricing→Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
D62 : Microeconomics→Welfare Economics→Externalities
D82 : Microeconomics→Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty→Asymmetric and Private Information, Mechanism Design
E6 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook
G22 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Insurance, Insurance Companies, Actuarial Studies
G28 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Government Policy and Regulation
H41 : Public Economics→Publicly Provided Goods→Public Goods
31 October 2022
WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 2743
Details
Abstract
Since the term was first coined in studies on the 1990s Japanese crisis, the concept of zombification has been investigated and revived repeatedly when concerns arise about credit misallocation and stagnating productivity growth in an economy. The starting point for these studies nearly always involves trying to identify the so-called ‘zombie’ firms. This has led in the past years to a proliferation of different definitions and identification methodologies. We survey the most prominent definitions, discussing advantages and limitations of each. We also undertake a comparison of methodologies on a common dataset for euro area firms from 2004-2019, with the exercise revealing limited overlap and low comparability in the firms identified by several prominent studies. In response, we introduce a formalisation of zombie-classifications which helps to make order in the growing number of variations and identification methodologies. Moreover, this formalisation also helps extending the concept of binary identification to that of fuzzy zombie-identification. In particular, we introduce a general procedure to turn arbitrary binary classifications into fuzzy ones showing it successfully increases consistency between zombie definitions.
JEL Code
L25 : Industrial Organization→Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior→Firm Performance: Size, Diversification, and Scope
D22 : Microeconomics→Production and Organizations→Firm Behavior: Empirical Analysis
D24 : Microeconomics→Production and Organizations→Production, Cost, Capital, Capital, Total Factor, and Multifactor Productivity, Capacity
C55 : Mathematical and Quantitative Methods→Econometric Modeling→Modeling with Large Data Sets?
O40 : Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth→Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity→General
18 May 2021
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - ARTICLE
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2021
Details
Abstract
Policy measures aimed at supporting corporates and the economy through the coronavirus pandemic may have supported not just otherwise viable firms, but also unprofitable but still operating firms – often referred to as “zombies”. This has in turn raised questions about an increased risk of zombification in the euro area economy, which could constrain the post-pandemic recovery. Firm-level, loan-level and supervisory data for euro area companies suggest that zombie firms may have temporarily benefited from loan schemes and accommodative credit conditions – but likely only to a modest degree. These firms may face tighter eligibility criteria for schemes and more recognition of credit risk in debt and loan pricing in the future. Tackling the risk of zombification more fundamentally requires the consideration of suggested reforms to insolvency frameworks and better infrastructure for banks to manage non-performing loans.
JEL Code
E51 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit→Money Supply, Credit, Money Multipliers
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, Depository Institutions, Micro Finance Institutions, Mortgages
G32 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→Financing Policy, Financial Risk and Risk Management, Capital and Ownership Structure, Value of Firms, Goodwill
G38 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance→Government Policy and Regulation
L25 : Industrial Organization→Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior→Firm Performance: Size, Diversification, and Scope
23 November 2020
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 2, 2020
Details
Abstract
The coronavirus pandemic has threatened the existence of many euro area firms. While liquidity shortages were seen as the major threat to corporate health at the beginning of the pandemic, more recently firms’ solvency has become the primary concern. Against this backdrop, this box assesses euro area corporate vulnerabilities and the underlying factors. It develops a new composite indicator that allows analysis of the time-varying impact and the relative importance of the factors driving corporate financial soundness and risk. Using aggregate sectoral accounts data, this measure combines indicators along five dimensions: debt service capacity, leverage/indebtedness, financing/rollover, profitability and activity. According to the composite indicator, corporate vulnerabilities have increased to levels last observed at the peak of the euro area sovereign debt crisis and are largely driven by a drop in sales, lower actual and expected profitability, and an increase in leverage and indebtedness. However, extensive monetary, fiscal and prudential policy measures have limited the increase in corporate vulnerability, primarily by ensuring favourable funding conditions. So far, government loan guarantees and bankruptcy moratoria have also prevented a large wave of corporate defaults, but a sizeable number of firms could be forced to file for bankruptcy if these measures are lifted too early or bank lending conditions tighten.
JEL Code
E6 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook
G3 : Financial Economics→Corporate Finance and Governance
25 May 2020
FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOX
Financial Stability Review Issue 1, 2020
Details
Abstract
On 27 March, ECB Banking Supervision recommended that banks refrain from paying out dividends and buying back shares until 1 October 2020, following earlier announcements of temporary capital and operational relief measures. All national authorities in the euro area had made similar requests to banks under their direct supervision. In recent years, euro area banks have increased dividend payouts and share buybacks. Had this continued under the current circumstances, it may have weakened the ability of banks to use retained earnings to absorb losses and support lending to the real economy. This box reviews patterns in global banks’ payouts to shareholders and the contribution that lower payouts may make towards improving bank resilience.