This paper reveals the underlying market preferences for sovereign debt of distressed euro area countries. We employ a generalised flexible market loss, as it nests both the linear and the non-linear form, as a function of the ‘basis’, the difference between sovereign bond spread and the Credit Default Swap. Our evidence shows that market preferences lean towards pessimism for some countries, in particular Greece. Those preferences do not remain stable over time as they shift further towards pessimism post the Greek bail out in spring 2010. As part of sensitivity analysis we apply a multivariate loss function to account for contagion effects in forming market preferences among different sovereign bonds. We also examine the impact of specific financial and fiscal governance factors on market preferences. Our results suggest that the market closely monitor fiscal fundamentals so as to shape preferences.

We examine the impact of the financial crisis on the stock market valuation of large and systemic U.S. bank holding companies (BHCs). Using the Bertsatos and Sakellaris (2016) model of fundamental valuation of bank equity, we provide evidence that the financial crisis has not altered investors’ attitudes towards bank characteristics. In particular, before, during, and after the crisis, investors in large and systemic U.S. BHCs seemed to penalize leverage, albeit temporarily. Both before and after the crisis, they reward size in the short run. This pattern is appearing only briefly during the crisis. We also show that bank opacity plays no role in market valuation either in the short run or in the long run. Last but not least, we find evidence that stress testing has been informative to the market and that those BHCs that failed at the post-crisis stress tests were not subsequently valued differently by the market.

In light of the ongoing restructuring of the European banking industry and the challenging macroeconomic environment, banks have increased their efforts to reduce operating costs. Yet, the institutional features that affect banks’ ability to adjust costs and in particular personnel expenses, which comprise a significant part of banks’ non-interest cost structure, have not been adequately studied. This paper investigates the effect of labour market institutions and regulations on bank performance in 15 European countries over the period 2005–2010, using the Fraser index for labour regulation and its disaggregated sub-components. We propose a novel methodology to measure performance, based on the seminal work of Kumbhakar and Tsionas (2005), which allows the estimation of technical and allocative efficiency and the examination of the effect of labour market regulations in a single stage. Results indicate the existence of a positive relationship between the liberalisation of EU labour markets and allocative efficiency, while the effect on technical efficiency appears to be negative, although not statistically significant. When looking at the disaggregated components of the labour index, we further confirm that different forces are at play.

We examine how bank efficiency during normal times affects survival, risk, and profitability during subsequent financial crises using data from five U.S. financial crises and preceding normal times. We find that cost efficiency during normal times helps reduce bank failure probabilities, decrease risk, and enhance profitability during subsequent financial crises, while profit efficiency has limited benefits. Results suggest that cost efficiency better measures management quality, while profit efficiency may partially reflect temporary high returns from risky investments during normal times. Findings have policy implications and imply that improving bank cost efficiency during normal times may promote better financial crisis performance.

We study whether management practices determine merger and acquisition (M&A) success. We model management as an unobserved (latent) variable in a standard microeconomic model of the firm and derive firm-year management estimates. We validate these estimates against benchmark survey data on management practices and by using Monte Carlo simulation. We show that our measure is among the most important determinants of value creation in M&A deals, substantially increasing the predictive power of models that explain cumulative abnormal returns. Thus, we offer a measure of management practices that identifies the best-performing M&As. Our results are robust to the inclusion of acquirer fixed effects and many control variables, and to several other sensitivity tests. We identify the Q-theory as the key mechanism driving our results.