Abstract
Banks face liquidity and capital pressures that favor selling off the loans they originate, but loan sales undermine their monitoring incentives. A bank's loan default history is a noisy measure of its past monitoring choices, which can serve as a reputation mechanism to incentivize current monitoring. In equilibrium, higher reputation banks monitor (weakly) more intensively; if retention is credible, they generally retain less of the loans they originate. Monitoring is difficult to sustain in periods with uncommonly large spikes in loan demand ("booms"), especially for low-reputation banks, which are more likely to accommodate boom demand and forgo monitoring.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 5886-5932 |
| Number of pages | 47 |
| Journal | Review of Financial Studies |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 1 2021 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2021 The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: [email protected].
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Monitoring in Originate-to-Distribute Lending: Reputation versus Skin in the Game'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS