[A lesson of the recent financial crisis is that the interbank market is crucial for banks facing uncertainty regarding their liquidity needs. This article studies the efficiency of the interbank market in allocating funds. We show that the central bank should lower the interbank rate when confronted with a crisis that causes a disparity in the liquidity held among banks. This suggests that the traditional tenet prescribing the separation between prudential regulation and monetary policy should be abandoned. We also show that failure to cut interest rates during a crisis erodes financial stability by increasing the risk of bank runs

A lesson of the recent financial crisis is that the interbank market is crucial for banks facing uncertainty regarding their liquidity needs. This article studies the efficiency of the interbank market in allocating funds. We show that the central bank should lower the interbank rate when confronted with a crisis that causes a disparity in the liquidity held among banks. This suggests that the traditional tenet prescribing the separation between prudential regulation and monetary policy should be abandoned. We also show that failure to cut interest rates during a crisis erodes financial stability by increasing the risk of bank runs

[We explore whether central bank intervention improves liquidity in the interbank market during the current subprime crisis with unique trade and quote data from the e-MID, the only regulated electronic interbank market in the world. Central bank intervention consistently creates greater uncertainty in the interbank market. Prior to the crisis, the cover-to-bid ratio effectively conveys good and bad news from the central bank, but this link is broken during the crisis, suggesting that standard (and special) interventions that do not specifically target interbank asymmetric information fail to improve market liquidity. Our results suggest that the central bank should release stress tests for individual banks, provide interbank loan guarantees, or engage in direct asset purchases rather than simply providing more capital when counterparty risk poses systemic risk to the interbank market

We explore whether central bank intervention improves liquidity in the interbank market during the current subprime crisis with unique trade and quote data from the e-MID, the only regulated electronic interbank market in the world. Central bank intervention consistently creates greater uncertainty in the interbank market. Prior to the crisis, the cover-to-bid ratio effectively conveys good and bad news from the central bank, but this link is broken during the crisis, suggesting that standard (and special) interventions that do not specifically target interbank asymmetric information fail to improve market liquidity. Our results suggest that the central bank should release stress tests for individual banks, provide interbank loan guarantees, or engage in direct asset purchases rather than simply providing more capital when counterparty risk poses systemic risk to the interbank market

[Empirical evidence suggests that banks hold capital in excess of regulatory minimums. This did not prevent the financial crisis and underlines the importance of understanding bank capital determination. Market discipline is one of the forces that induces banks to hold positive capital. The literature has focused on the liability side. We develop a simple theory based on monitoring to show that discipline from the asset side can also be important. In perfectly competitive markets, banks can find it optimal to use costly capital rather than the interest rate on the loan to commit to monitoring because it allows higher borrower surplus

Empirical evidence suggests that banks hold capital in excess of regulatory minimums. This did not prevent the financial crisis and underlines the importance of understanding bank capital determination. Market discipline is one of the forces that induces banks to hold positive capital. The literature has focused on the liability side. We develop a simple theory based on monitoring to show that discipline from the asset side can also be important. In perfectly competitive markets, banks can find it optimal to use costly capital rather than the interest rate on the loan to commit to monitoring because it allows higher borrower surplus