Debt Underwriting by Commercial Bank-Affiliated Firms and Investment Banks: More Evidence
Debt Underwriting by Commercial Bank-Affiliated Firms and Investment Banks: More Evidence
复制标题
商业银行附属公司和投资银行的债务承销：更多证据
DOI：
10.2139/ssrn.236843
复制
发表时间：
2000
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Ivan C. Roten
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Donald J. Mullineaux;Ivan C. Roten
我们研究了1995- 1998年期间商业银行附属公司（第20部分）和传统投资银行的承销业绩。我们发现，在第20条承保的情况下，总息差明显较低，但收益率息差并非如此。我们的样本包括1997年初美联储政策变化后的大量观察结果，这些政策大大放松了对第20条活动的限制。我们的研究结果与关注这些政策变化之前时期的文献结果有所不同。例如，我们发现，没有证据表明先前的商业银行贷款关系会影响任何类型发行的承销收益率。我们的结果也未能证实先前的证据，即第20条集体承保对总息差和收益率息差产生有利的竞争效应。我们发现大量证据表明，承保组合和承保过程都与样本期内的总利差和收益率利差的行为有关。
We examine underwriting performances by commercial bank-affiliated firms (Section 20's) and traditional investment banks over the period 1995-98. We find that gross spreads are significantly lower in the case of Section 20 underwritings, but that yield spreads are not. Our sample includes a substantial number of observations following changes in Federal Reserve policies that substantially eased restrictions on Section 20 activities in early 1997. Our findings differ somewhat from results in the literature that focused on periods prior to these policy changes. We find, for example, no evidence that a prior commercial-bank lending relationship influences underwriting yields for any type of issue. Our results also fail to confirm earlier evidence that collective Section 20 underwritings produce a favorable competitive effect on gross spreads and yield spreads. We find substantial evidence that both the underwriting mix and the underwriting process are relevant to the behavior of gross spreads and yield spreads over the sample period.