• Graduate Programs
    • Facilities
    • Tinbergen Institute Research Master in Economics
      • Why Tinbergen Institute?
      • Research Master
      • Admissions
      • PhD Vacancies
      • Selected PhD Placements
    • Research Master Business Data Science
    • Education for external participants
    • Summer School
    • Tinbergen Institute Lectures
    • PhD Vacancies
  • Research
  • Browse our Courses
  • Events
    • Summer School
      • Applied Public Policy Evaluation
      • Deep Learning
      • Development Economics
      • Economics of Blockchain and Digital Currencies
      • Economics of Climate Change
      • The Economics of Crime
      • Foundations of Machine Learning with Applications in Python
      • From Preference to Choice: The Economic Theory of Decision-Making
      • Inequalities in Health and Healthcare
      • Marketing Research with Purpose
      • Markets with Frictions
      • Modern Toolbox for Spatial and Functional Data
      • Sustainable Finance
      • Tuition Fees and Payment
      • Business Data Science Summer School Program
    • Events Calendar
    • Events Archive
    • Tinbergen Institute Lectures
    • 2026 Tinbergen Institute Opening Conference
    • Annual Tinbergen Institute Conference
  • News
  • Summer School
  • Alumni
    • PhD Theses
    • Master Theses
    • Selected PhD Placements
    • Key alumni publications
    • Alumni Community

\van Oordt\, M. and Zhou, C. (2019). Systemic risk and bank business models Journal of Applied Econometrics, 34(3):365--384.


  • Journal
    Journal of Applied Econometrics

In this paper, we decompose banks' systemic risk into two dimensions: the risk of a bank (“bank tail risk”) and the link of the bank to the system in financial distress (“systemic linkage”). Based on extreme value theory, we estimate a systemic risk measure that can be decomposed into two subcomponents reflecting these dimensions. Empirically, we assess the relationships of bank business models to the two dimensions of systemic risk. The observed differences in these relationships partly explain why micro- and macroprudential perspectives sometimes have different implications for banking regulation.