Analyzing Bank Efficiency: Are “Too-Big-to-Fail” Banks Efficient?

  • Hulusi Inanoglu
  • Michael JacobsJr.
  • Junrong Liu
  • Robin Sickles


The recent financial crisis has given rise to a re-examination by regulators and academics of the conventional wisdom regarding the implications of the spectacular growth of the financial sector of the economy. In the pre-crisis era, there was a widespread common wisdom that “bigger is better.” The arguments underpinning this view ranged from potential economies of scale and scope, to a better competitive stance at the international level. However, in the post-crisis world the common wisdom has been altered somewhat as large banks have come to be viewed as problematic for policy makers and regulators, for various reasons. One reason often given is that economic agents who are insured have the incentive to take on too much ex ante risk; also known as the moral hazard problem. Second, there is the “too-big-to-fail” problem: the fear that large and interconnected financial institutions may become a source of systemic risk if allowed to go out of business, especially in a “disorderly” fashion (Bernanke (2009)). Support for or against large banking institutions turns on the central issue of whether or not efficiencies of scale and scope are economically and statistically significant and are positively associated with bank size. If they are positively associated with bank size then the expected benefits of the cost savings generated by increased efficiencies passed on to consumers in terms of better services or reduced banking service fees are traded off with the expected costs implicit in the moral hazard and systemic risk arguments.


Credit Risk Stochastic Frontier Market Risk Large Bank Saving Account 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allen, F. and Santomero, A.M. 2001. “What Do Financial Intermediaries Do?” Journal of Banking and Finance, 25: 271–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Balk, B.M. 2001. “Scale Efficiency and Productivity Change.” Journal of Productivity Analysis, 15: 159–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balk, B.M. 2008. Price and Quantity Index Numbers: Models for Measuring Aggregate Change and Difference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baltensperger, E. 1980. “Alternative Approaches to the Theory of the Banking Firm.” Journal of Monetary Economics, 6: 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Battese, G.E., and Coelli, T.J. 1992. “Frontier Production Functions, Technical Efficiency and Panel Data: with Application to Paddy Farmers in India.” Journal of Productivity Analysis, 3: 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. BCBS. 2009a. Revisions to the Basel II market risk framework. Updated December 2010.Google Scholar
  7. BCBS. 2009b. Principles for Sound Stress Testing Practices and Supervision. Consultative Paper, May (No. 155).Google Scholar
  8. BCBS. 2012. Fundamental Review of the Trading Book, Scholar
  9. Bernanke, B. 2009. Financial Reform to Address Systemic Risk. Council on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC March 10, 2009.Google Scholar
  10. Caves, D.W., Christensen, L.R. and Diewert, W.E. 1982. “The Economic Theory of Index Numbers and the Measurement of Input, Output, and Productivity.” Econometrica, 50: 1393–1414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coelli, T. 2000. On the Econometric Estimation of the Distance Function Representation of a Production Technology. Center for Operations Research & Econometrics, Universite Catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar
  12. Coelli, T., and Perelman, S. 1996. “Efficiency Measurement, Multiple-output Technologie and Distance Functions: With Application to European Railways.” CREPP Working Paper 96/05, University of Liege.Google Scholar
  13. DeYoung, R. 2010. Scale Economies Are a Distraction. The Region, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  14. Efron, B., and Tibshirani, R. 1986. “Bootstrap Methods for Standard Errors, Confidence Intervals, and Other Measures of Statistical Accuracy.” Statistical Science, 1: 54–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feldman, R. 2010. Size and Regulatory Reform in Finance: Important but Difficult Questions. The Region, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  16. Frye, J., and Pelz, E. 2008. BankCaR (Bank Capital-at-Risk): US Commercial Bank Chargeoffs. Working Paper, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (2008: 3).Google Scholar
  17. Galvao, A.F. 2011. “Quantile Regression for Dynamic Panel Data with Fixed Effects.” Journal of Econometrics, 164: 142–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gregory, J. 2014. Central Counterparties: Mandatory Clearing and Bilateral Margin Requirements for OTC Derivatives. John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hajargasht, G., Coelli, T., and Rao, D. 2008. “A Dual Measure of Economies of Scope.” Economics Letters, 100: 185–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Haldane 2009. “Banking on the State.” Scholar
  21. Hausman, J.A., and Taylor, W.E. 1981. “Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects.” Econometrica, 49: 1377–1398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hughes, J.P., and Mester, L.J. 1998. “Bank Capitalization and Cost: Evidence of Scale Economies in Risk Management and Signaling.” Review of Economics and Statistics, 80: 314–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hughes, J.P., and Mester, L.J. 2008. “Efficiency in Banking: Theory, Practice and Evidence.” FRB of Philadelphia Working Paper No. 08–01.Google Scholar
  24. Hughes, J.P., Mester, L.J., and Moon, C.G. 2001. “Are Scale Economies in Banking Elusive or Illusive?: Evidence Obtained by Incorporating Capital Structure and Risk-taking into Models of Bank Production.” Journal of Banking & Finance, 25: 2169–2208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Inanoglu, H., Jacobs, Jr. M., and Karagozoglu, A.K. 2014 (Spring). “Empirical Analysis of Bank Capital and New Regulatory Requirements for Risks in Trading Portfolios.” Journal of Fixed Income, 23 (4): 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jorion, P. 2002. “How Informative are Value-at-risk Disclosures?” The Accounting Review, 77 (4): 911–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Klein, L.R. 1953. A Textbook of Econometrics. Row, Peterson & Company, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
  28. Koenker, R. 1984. “A Note on L-estimates for Linear Models.” Statistics & Probability Letters, 2: 323–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Koenker, R. 2004. “Quantile Regression for Longitudinal Data.” Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 91: 74–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koenker, R. 2009. “Quantreg: Quantile Regression.” R package version 4.Google Scholar
  31. Koenker, R., Bassett, G. Jr. 1978. “Regression Quantiles.” Econometrica, 46: 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mosteller, F. 1946. “On Some Useful ‘Inefficient’ Statistics.” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 17: 377–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Newey, W.K. 1990. “Semiparametric Efficiency Bounds.” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 5: 99–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pagan, A., and Ullah, A. 1999. Nonparametric Econometrics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Park, B.U., Sickles, R.C., and Simar, L. 1998. “Stochastic Panel Frontiers: A Semiparametric Approach.” Journal of Econometrics, 84: 273–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Park, B.U., Sickles, R.C., and Simar, L. 2003. “Semiparametric-efficient Estimation of AR (1) Panel Data Models.” Journal of Econometrics, 117: 279–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Park, B.U., Sickles, R.C., and Simar, L. 2007. “Semiparametric Efficient Estimation of Dynamic Panel Data Models.” Journal of Econometrics, 136: 281–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Park, B.U., and Simar, L. 1994. “Efficient Semiparametric Estimation in a Stochastic Frontier Model.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89: 929–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pitt, M.M., and Lee, L.F. 1981. “The Measurement and Sources of Technical Inefficiency in the Indonesian Weaving Industry.” Journal of Development Economics, 9: 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. R Core Development Team. 2010. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
  41. Ritter, C., and Simar, L. 1997. “Pitfalls of Normal-gamma Stochastic Frontier Models.” Journal of Productivity Analysis, 8: 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Schmidt, P., and Sickles, R.C. 1984. “Production Frontiers and Panel Data.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 2: 367–374.Google Scholar
  43. Sealey, C.W., and Lindley, J.T. 1977. “Inputs, Outputs, and a Theory of Production and Cost at Depository Financial Institutions.” The Journal of Finance, 32: 1251–1266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sickles, R.C. 2005. “Panel Estimators and the Identification of Firm-specific Efficiency Levels in Parametric, Semiparametric and Nonparametric Settings.” Journal of Econometrics, 126: 305–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tarullo, D.K. 2011. Industrial Organization and Systemic Risk: An Agenda for Further Research. Conference on Regulating Systemic Risk, Washington, DC September 15, 2011.Google Scholar
  46. Tracey, B., and Davies, R. 2012. Too Big to be Efficient? The Impact of Implicit Funding Subsidies on Scale Economies in Banking. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  47. Wheelock, D.C., and Wilson, P.W. 2012. “Do Large Banks have Lower Costs? New Estimates of Returns to Scale for US Banks.” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 44: 171–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Hulusi Inanoglu, Michael Jacobs, Jr., Junrong Liu and Robin Sickles 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hulusi Inanoglu
  • Michael JacobsJr.
  • Junrong Liu
  • Robin Sickles

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations