There is ample empirical literature centering on the effectiveness of foreign exchange intervention (FXI). Given the mix of objectives and country-heterogeneity, the general lack of consensus thus far is no surprise. We shed light on this debate by conducting the first comprehensive meta-analysis in the FXI literature, with 279 reported effects that stem from 74 distinct empirical studies. We cover estimations conducted in 19 countries across five decades. Overall, our meta-survey reports an average depreciation of domestic currency of 1% and a reduction of exchange rate volatility of 0.6%, in response to a $1 billion US dollar purchase. Results are qualitatively confirmed but smaller in size under fixed and random-effect estimations. When narrowing in on different economic factors, we find that effects are magnified for cases consistent with the monetary trilemma (greater if financial openness and monetary independence are low). Effects are also larger in emerging than advanced economies, when banking crises remain mild, and when interventions are large in size and are announced.

We study whether floods can affect financial stability through a credit risk channel. Our focus is onthe Netherlands, a country situated partly below sea level, where insurance policies exclude property damages caused by some types of floods. Using geocoded data for close to EUR 650 billion in real estate exposures, we consider possible implications of such floods for bank capital. For a set of 38 adverse scenarios, we estimate that flood-related property damages lead to capital declines that mostly range between 30 and 50 basis points. We highlight how starting-point loan-to-value ratios are one important driver of capital impacts. Our estimates focus on property damages as the main transmission channel and are also subject to a number of assumptions. If climate change continues, more frequent floods or flood-related macrofinancial disruptions may have stronger implications for financial stability than our estimates so far indicate.

This study examines why firms’ access to finance differs across countries and assesses the extent to which democracy and financial liberalisation account for these variations. Using political economy and liberalisation theories as a foundation, we analyse a comprehensive dataset of over 110,000 firms across 112 economies between 2006 and 2021. Although previous research identifies firm-level and macroeconomic sources of financial frictions, evidence on the institutional drivers of cross-country financial access remains limited. Our findings show that democracy and financial liberalisation, when considered independently, are associated with reduced access to finance. However, when both conditions coexist, they ease financing barriers and enhance access to finance. These results remain consistent across multiple robustness tests, including alternative model specifications, endogeneity corrections, and various measures of institutional quality and financial openness. Overall, the study highlights that neither democracy nor liberalisation alone is sufficient to enhance access to credit. Instead, simultaneous institutional strengthening and financial market access are necessary to ease financing barriers. This has important policy implications, particularly for emerging and developing economies seeking to expand firm-level access to capital and stimulate economic growth.

We examine how ETF adoption affects retail investor performance using a comprehensive panel of 524,181 Finnish investors tracked from 2007 to 2022. ETF adopters tend to be older, predominantly male, and more active, holding smaller but better-diversified portfolios. Importantly, first-time use of ETFs yields statistically significant improvements in risk-adjusted returns. ETF users also demonstrate greater portfolio resilience during financial crises. Our findings confirm that ETFs serve as effective tools for enhancing performance and managing risk for retail investors.

Banks play a central role in the financial system and benefit the real economy by managing risk, and providing finance to households, small and medium-sized enterprises, large corporates and governments. However, their complexity, opacity and interconnectedness can elevate bank-level and systemic risks, posing dangers to the financial system and real economy. This was evident during the global financial crisis where taxpayer funded bailouts were used to rescue ailing banks, which in turn led to an overhaul of regulation and supervision. Consequently, safeguarding bank stability and addressing systemic risks via well designed regulations is essential for ensuring economic resilience and societal well-being. This study uses a quasi-natural experimental research design in the form of the Dutch Liquidity Balance Rule (LBR) to evaluate the impacts of liquidity regulation on bank-level stability and systemic risk. Our findings show that following the introduction of liquidity regulation, the stability of Dutch banks increases significantly relative to counterparts in neighbouring countries unaffected by the regulation. The observed reduction in risk stems from improved capitalization and reduced leverage, which contribute to greater financial stability. Systemic risk also decreases. Our findings have relevance beyond our research setting for policymakers tasked with implementing and monitoring the impacts of similar forms of liquidity regulation (such as bank liquidity coverage ratios) post global financial crisis.

With rising public attention to climate change, the proliferation of green mutual funds reflects expectations that they will contribute to a sustainable economic transition. This paper investigates the effects of climate news on mutual fund flows and portfolio allocation decisions. Using detailed flow- and holding-level data, we observe that heightened climate news results in significantly larger capital inflows into green funds than into their non-green counterparts. Furthermore, we show that, in response to climate news, green funds decrease their exposure to high-polluting firms relative to low-polluting firms more than non-green funds do. These results suggest that increasing public attention boosts capital reallocation towards green funds and that, in turn, potentially fosters investment relocation towards more environmentally friendly companies

We develop a credit-risk based framework for macroprudential policy that treats systemic risk as the credit exposure of a policymaker to a portfolio of supervised banks. Using a structural credit model estimated from Credit Default Swap (CDS) prices, we derive the socially optimal capital buffers per bank by balancing the benefits of lower systemic risk against the economic costs of higher capital requirements through reduced credit supply. Applying this framework to Europe’s systemic banks, we find that the market-based optimal buffers are substantially higher than those currently in use and vary significantly across institutions. Conditional on current country averages, within-country buffers are aligned close to optimally; suboptimality mostly arises from substantial differences between country averages.

We address the challenge of dynamic option hedging using deep reinforcement learning (DRL). Unlike traditional model-based approaches, DRL is purely data-driven and does not require explicit modeling of the underlying market dynamics. Leveraging a comprehensive high-frequency dataset of SPX options, we train, validate, and test a DRL agent in a realistic market environment that incorporates actual transaction costs. The study highlights three key contributions. First, we analyze the hedging of 0DTE (zero days-to-expiration) options, which now dominate market trading volume, and show that DRL outperforms Black–Scholes delta hedging at this horizon. Second, we evaluate robustness across regimes, finding that the DRL hedge remains effective in crises such as COVID-19, even when trained only on non-crisis periods. Third, we examine the determinants of the performance gap, the role of alternative reward specifications, and hedging behavior in the presence of price jumps.