We examine the impact of fire sales on the UK financial system through commonly held assets across different financial sectors. In particular, we model indirect contagion via fire sales across UK banks and non-banks subject to different types of constraints. We find that performing a stress simulation that does not account for common asset holdings across multiple sectors can severely underestimate the fire sale losses in the financial system. In addition, pro-rata liquidation strategy would result in a higher level of fire sale losses in the system as whole, but a waterfall strategy may produce a higher spillover effect for a passive institution (or a passive sector) that chooses not to promptly liquidate any of its assets during distress while other institutions decide to do so.

We investigate a simple dynamical model for the systemic risk caused by the use of Value-at-Risk, as mandated by Basel II. The model consists of a bank with a leverage target and an unleveraged fundamentalist investor subject to exogenous noise with clustered volatility. The parameter space has three regions: (i) a stable region, where the system has a fixed point equilibrium; (ii) a locally unstable region, characterized by cycles with chaotic behavior; and (iii) a globally unstable region. A calibration of parameters to data puts the model in region (ii). In this region there is a slowly building price bubble, resembling the period prior to the Global Financial Crisis, followed by a crash resembling the crisis, with a period of approximately 10–15 years. We dub this the Basel leverage cycle. To search for an optimal leverage control policy we propose a criterion based on the ability to minimize risk for a given average leverage. Our model allows us to vary from the procyclical policies of Basel II or III, in which leverage decreases when volatility increases, to countercyclical policies in which leverage increases when volatility increases. We find the best policy depends on the market impact of the bank. Basel II is optimal when the exogenous noise is high, the bank is small and leverage is low; in the opposite limit where the bank is large and leverage is high the optimal policy is closer to constant leverage. In the latter regime systemic risk can be dramatically decreased by lowering the leverage target adjustment speed of the banks. While our model does not show that the financial crisis and the period leading up to it were due to VaR risk management policies, it does suggest that it could have been caused by VaR risk management, and that the housing bubble may have just been the spark that triggered the crisis.

Financial markets create endogenous systemic risk, the risk that a substantial fraction of the system ceases to function and collapses. Systemic risk can propagate through different mechanisms and channels of contagion. One important form of financial contagion arises from indirect interconnections between financial institutions mediated by financial markets. This indirect interconnection occurs when financial institutions invest in common assets and is referred to as overlapping portfolios. In this work we quantify systemic risk from indirect interconnections between financial institutions. Complete information of security holdings of major Mexican financial intermediaries and the ability to uniquely identify securities in their portfolios, allows us to represent the Mexican financial system as a bipartite network of securities and financial institutions. This makes it possible to quantify systemic risk arising from overlapping portfolios. We show that focusing only on direct interbank exposures underestimates total systemic risk levels by up to 50% under the assumptions of the model. By representing the financial system as a multi-layer network of direct interbank exposures (default contagion) and indirect external exposures (overlapping portfolios) we estimate the mutual influence of different channels of contagion. The method presented here is the first quantification of systemic risk on national scales that includes overlapping portfolios.

Common asset holdings are widely believed to have been the primary vector of contagion in the recent financial crisis. We develop a network approach to the amplification of financial contagion due to the combination of overlapping portfolios and leverage, and we show how it can be understood in terms of a generalized branching process. This can be used to compute the stability for any particular configuration of portfolios. By studying a stylized model we estimate the circumstances under which systemic instabilities are likely to occur as a function of parameters such as leverage, market crowding, diversification, and market impact. Although diversification may be good for individual institutions, it can create dangerous systemic effects, and as a result financial contagion gets worse with too much diversification. There is a critical threshold for leverage; below it financial networks are always stable, and above it the unstable region grows as leverage increases. Note that our model assumes passive portfolio management during a crisis; however, we show that dynamic deleveraging during a crisis can amplify instabilities. The financial system exhibits “robust yet fragile” behavior, with regions of the parameter space where contagion is rare but catastrophic whenever it occurs. Our model and methods of analysis can be calibrated to real data and provide simple yet powerful tools for macroprudential stress testing.