This paper compares performance of domestic and foreign banks in Malaysia during the Asian crisis. We find that foreign banks were not a homogeneous group: while banks with a stronger regional focus suffered from the crisis as much as domestic banks, foreign banks not focused on Asia performed significantly better. The key difference appears to be exposure to sectors hurt by the bursting of the asset price bubble. Availability of support from parent banks, likelihood of being bailed out, or political connections do not seem to explain the differences. Theories of managerial herding may explain why non-regional foreign banks were not caught in the financial bubble.

ABSTRACT We study how foreign bank penetration affects financial sector development in poor countries. A theoretical model shows that when domestic banks are better than foreign banks at monitoring soft information customers, foreign bank entry may hurt these customers and worsen welfare. The model also predicts that credit to the private sector should be lower in countries with more foreign bank penetration, and that foreign banks should have a less risky loan portfolio. In the empirical section, we test these predictions for a sample of lower income countries and find support for the theoretical model.