Social Indicators Research

, Volume 146, Issue 1–2, pp 169–186 | Cite as

Cross-Country Assessment of Systemic Risk in the European Stock Market: Evidence from a CoVaR Analysis

  • Lea PetrellaEmail author
  • Alessandro G. Laporta
  • Luca Merlo


This work is intended to assess the contribution to systemic risk of major companies in the European stock market on a geographical basis. We use the EuroStoxx 50 Index as a proxy for the financial system and we rely on the CoVaR and \(\varDelta\)-CoVaR risk measures to estimate the contribution of each European country belonging to the index to systemic risk. We also conduct the significance and dominance test to evaluate whether the systemic relevance of considered countries is statistically significant and to determine which nation exerts the greatest influence on the spreading of negative spillover effects on the entire economy. Our empirical results show that, for the period ranging from 2008 to 2017, all countries contribute significantly to systemic risk, especially in times of crisis and high volatility in the markets. Moreover, it emerges that France is the systemically riskiest country, followed by Germany, Italy, Spain and Netherlands.


Systemic risk CoVaR \(\varDelta\)-CoVaR Quantile regression EuroStoxx 50 Index 



This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Abadie, A. (2002). Bootstrap tests for distributional treatment effects in instrumental variable models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 97(457), 284–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acharya, V. V., Pedersen, L. H., Philippon, T., & Richardson, M. (2017). Measuring systemic risk. The Review of Financial Studies, 30(1), 2–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adrian, T., & Brunnermeier, M. K. (2016). CoVaR. The American Economic Review, 106(7), 1705–1741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Algieri, B., & Leccadito, A. (2017). Assessing contagion risk from energy and non-energy commodity markets. Energy Economics, 62, 312–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bansal, A. (2016). Systemic importance of insurance companies–An empirical analysis. Social Science Research Network.
  6. Bernal, O., Gnabo, J. Y., & Guilmin, G. (2014). Assessing the contribution of banks, insurance and other financial services to systemic risk. Journal of Banking and Finance, 47, 270–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernardi, M., Gayraud, G., Petrella, L., et al. (2015). Bayesian tail risk interdependence using quantile regression. Bayesian Analysis, 10(3), 553–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernardi, M., Durante, F., Jaworski, P., Petrella, L., & Salvadori, G. (2018). Conditional risk based on multivariate hazard scenarios. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 32(1), 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bernardi, M., Maruotti, A., & Petrella, L. (2017). Multiple risk measures for multivariate dynamic heavy-tailed models. Journal of Empirical Finance, 43, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brownlees, CT., & Engle, RF. (2012). Volatility, correlation and tails for systemic risk measurement. Social Science Research Network.
  11. Castro, C., & Ferrari, S. (2014). Measuring and testing for the systemically important financial institutions. Journal of Empirical Finance, 25, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chao, S. K., Härdle, W. K., & Wang, W. (2015). Quantile regression in risk calibration. In Handbook of financial econometrics and statistics, Berlin: Springer (pp 1467–1489).Google Scholar
  13. Gauthier, C., Lehar, A., & Souissi, M. (2012). Macroprudential capital requirements and systemic risk. Journal of Financial Intermediation, 21(4), 594–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Girardi, G., & Ergün, A. T. (2013). Systemic risk measurement: Multivariate GARCH estimation of CoVaR. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(8), 3169–3180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koenker, R. (2005). Quantile Regression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Koenker, R., & Bassett, G. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 46(1), 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu, B. Y., Ji, Q., & Fan, Y. (2017). Dynamic return-volatility dependence and risk measure of covar in the oil market: A time-varying mixed copula model. Energy Economics, 68, 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. López-Espinosa, G., Moreno, A., Rubia, A., & Valderrama, L. (2012). Short-term wholesale funding and systemic risk: A global CoVaR approach. Journal of Banking and Finance, 36(12), 3150–3162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lum, K., Gelfand, A. E., et al. (2012). Spatial quantile multiple regression using the asymmetric laplace process. Bayesian Analysis, 7(2), 235–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lea Petrella
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alessandro G. Laporta
    • 1
  • Luca Merlo
    • 1
  1. 1.MEMOTEF DepartmentSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations