Strategic Risk Modeling by Banks: Evidence from inside the Black Box

Clicks: 4
ID: 322547
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #5 of 10 articles by views in The Review of Corporate Finance Studies

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Regulators condition bank capital on risk but struggle to measure risk accurately. Capital requirements thus rely on inputs from banks’ internal risk models, and banks have discretion over modeling choices. Using novel hand-collected data we show that reported bank risk varies systematically with simulation method, holding period, and historical data size. Hence, modeling choices can be a significant channel of underreporting of risk. Consistent with this presumption we find that less-capitalized banks tend to choose less conservative methods. Moreover, banks using a softer simulation method display higher actual market risk, while reporting lower market risk to regulators. (JEL G01, G21, G28)
Reference Key
openalex_W7171206998 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Mike Mariathasan, Ouarda Merrouche, Elizaveta Sizova
Journal The Review of Corporate Finance Studies
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/rcfs/cfag024
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.