We investigate whether the U.S. stock market disciplines asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP) liquidity guarantors who exploit a regulatory loophole that exempts at least 90% of the risk capital charge. We find that the market reduces liquidity guarantors’ franchise value when a short ABCP maturity causes the conduit credit losses to remain with guarantors rather than being transferred to investors. Banks with franchise value more sensitive to the ABCP guarantee cost maintain a higher risk capital buffer. We interpret our findings as evidence that market discipline–complexity of the shadow banking system notwithstanding–alleviates the consequence of regulatory arbitrage.

We investigate the changes in risk sensitivities of interest rates following a shift in Prosper.com's pricing mechanism from auctions to posted prices. We find that the shift leads to reduced sensitivities of loan pricing to credit risk. Furthermore, this change results in higher profits for the platform while investors receive less compensation for the credit risk they undertake. Additionally, borrowers encounter less credit rationing. Analyses of repeat borrowers under both pricing regimes and tests with data under Prosper's upgraded posted prices confirm these findings. We argue that less risk-based pricing results from the incentives of the lending platform.