Ni na voljo v slovenščini.
- 16 November 2022
- FINANCIAL STABILITY REVIEW - BOXFinancial Stability Review Issue 2, 2022Details
- Interest rate swaps account for the largest share of the euro area derivatives market. Outstanding contracts on EURIBOR swaps have risen sharply since 2021, possibly reflecting expectations of monetary policy normalisation. Using trade repository data on individual EURIBOR swap trades between 2019 and 2022, this box identifies how the risk is being shared across sectors in the interest rate swaps market and who would pay margins to whom should rates change. Empirical findings show that euro area banks are among the most active counterparties in EURIBOR swaps, due to either their role as market-makers or their need to hedge interest rate risk. Investment funds, insurance companies and pension funds would need to make margin payments in the event of rising interest rates.
- JEL Code
- G12 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Asset Pricing, Trading Volume, Bond Interest Rates
G13 : Financial Economics→General Financial Markets→Contingent Pricing, Futures Pricing
G21 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Banks, 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
G24 : Financial Economics→Financial Institutions and Services→Investment Banking, Venture Capital, Brokerage, Ratings and Ratings Agencies
E43 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Interest Rates: Determination, Term Structure, and Effects
E44 : Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics→Money and Interest Rates→Financial Markets and the Macroeconomy
- 16 January 2019
- WORKING PAPER SERIES - No. 2223Details
- Should monetary policy lean against financial stability risks? This has been a subject of fierce debate over the last decades. We contribute to the debate about “leaning against the wind” (LAW) along three lines. First, we evaluate the cost and benefits of LAW using the Svensson (2017) framework for the euro area and find that the costs outweigh the benefits. Second, we extend the framework to address a critique that Svensson does not consider the lower frequency financial cycle. Third, we use this extended framework to assess the costs and benefits of monetary and macroprudential policy. We find that macroprudential policy has net marginal benefits in addressing risks to financial stability in the euro area, whereas monetary policy has net marginal costs. This would suggest that an active use of macroprudential policies targeting financial stability risks would alleviate the burden on monetary policy to “lean against the wind”.
- 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