
AbstractWe develop a methodology to identify and rank ‘systemically important financial institutions’ (SIFIs). Our approach is free of discretion and based entirely on publicly available data, thus filling the gap between the judgment of the regulator and the views that market participants may form with their own information. We apply the methodology to three samples of banks (global, EU and euro area) for the years 2007–2012 and find that both the nature of systemic importance and its geographical distribution have changed significantly over time, with a shift from advanced western economies towards emerging markets, particularly China. Moreover, a distinctive consequence of the crisis is the proliferation of SIFIs that are at the same time complex and poorly substitutable, a combination that seemed relatively rare at the onset of the crisis and might not be entirely consistent with regulatory aspirations for a less risky financial framework.
systemic risk, too big to fail, jel: jel:G18, jel: jel:G01, jel: jel:G21
systemic risk, too big to fail, jel: jel:G18, jel: jel:G01, jel: jel:G21
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 10 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
