This paper examines the implications of bank activity and short-term funding strategies for bank risk and return using an international sample of 1,334 banks in 101 countries leading up to the 2008 financial crisis. Expansion into noninterest income-generating activities such as trading increases the rate of return on assets, and it could offer some risk diversification benefits at very low levels. Nondeposit, wholesale funding in contrast lowers the rate of return on assets, while it can offer some risk reduction at commonly observed low levels of nondeposit funding. A sizable proportion of banks, however, attract most of their short-term funding in the form of nondeposits at a cost of enhanced bank fragility. Overall, banking strategies that rely prominently on generating noninterest income or attracting nondeposit funding are very risky, consistent with the demise of the US investment banking sector.

This paper is a first attempt at measuring financial sector outreach and investigating its determinants. First, we present new indicators of banking sector outreach across 99 countries, constructed from aggregate data provided by bank regulators. Second, we show that our indicators closely predict harder-to-collect micro-level statistics of household and firm use of banking services, and are associated with measures of firm financing obstacles in the expected way. Finally, we explore the association between our outreach indicators and standard determinants of financial sector depth. We find many similarities but also some differences in the determinants of outreach and depth.

We investigate whether firms’ access to external financing to fund growth differs in market-based and bank-based financial systems. Using firm-level data for 40 countries, we compute the proportion of firms in each country relying on external finance and examine how that proportion differs across financial systems. We find that the development of a country's legal system predicts access to external finance, and stock markets and the banking system affect access to external finance differently. However, we find no evidence that firms’ access to external financing is predicted by several proxies for relative development of stock markets to the development of the banking system.

We examine firm debt maturity in 30 countries during the period 1980–1991. In countries with active stock markets, large firms have more long-term debt. Stock market activity is not correlated with debt levels of small firms. By contrast, in countries with a large banking sector, small firms have less short-term debt and their debt is of longer maturity. Variation in the size of the banking sector is uncorrelated with the capital structures of large firms. Government subsidies to industry are positively related and inflation is negatively related to the use of long-term debt. We also find evidence of maturity matching.

Using a sample of 70 former colonies, this paper assesses two theories regarding the historical determinants of financial development. The law and finance theory holds that legal traditions, brought by colonizers, differ in terms of protecting the rights of private investors vis-à-vis the state, with important implications for financial markets. The endowment theory argues that the disease environment encountered by colonizers influences the formation of long-lasting institutions that shape financial development. The empirical results provide evidence for both theories. However, initial endowments explain more of the cross-country variation in financial intermediary and stock market development.

We find that shareholder-friendly corporate governance is associated with higher stand-alone and systemic risk in the banking sector. Specifically, shareholder-friendly corporate governance results in higher risk for larger banks and for banks that are located in countries with generous financial safety nets as banks try to shift risk toward taxpayers. We confirm our findings by comparing banks to nonfinancial firms and examining changes in bank risk around an exogenous regulatory change in governance. Our results underline the importance of the financial safety net and too-big-to-fail guarantees in thinking about corporate governance reforms at banks.