NYU Stern Professor and Nobel Laureate Robert Engle delivered the inaugural session of the Gallatin Lecture Series on Banking, the first of four lectures jointly hosted by NYU Stern and The Clearing House. His presentation, titled Prospects for Financial Stability, drew on the work of Stern’s Volatility Lab and explained the varying levels of systemic risk in different countries, relative to GDP and market capitalization.
In his lecture, Professor Engle noted “that it is difficult to test for risk on a forward-looking basis, but showed that the Systemic Risk Ranking results were consistent with what was seen during the 2008 financial crisis, and when applied to banks, provided a rapid and effective alternative to supervisory stress tests to determine strong and weak banks.”
To read more about Professor Engle’s lecture and the new Gallatin Lecture Series on Banking, please click here.
In a recent article on Bankrate, NYU Stern Professor Roy Smith discussed the stabilizing US banking industry, including current threats to the economy, a long-term outlook of the industry, and the impact of several legal regulations. In particular, Professor Smith explained the continued implementation of the Basel III standards- an international agreement that requires large banks to increase the amount of capital they have on hand to cover bad loans- and the construction of a new legal framework under the Dodd-Frank financial reform law in 2014:
“Four years after it was passed, it’s still got a long way to go to be done, but the major parts of it are clear,” Smith says.
Among those major parts are capital requirements that are higher even than those called for in Basel III.
“That’s going to mean that the banks, who already have doubled the amount of capital to meet Basel III, have to add some more and limit other things,” he says.
To read more of Professor Smith’s insights on the banking industry, please click here.
In a recent opinion editorial on Strategy + Business, NYU Stern Global Research Professor Ian Bremmer discussed how businesses can succeed in a time of geopolitical turbulence and an uncertain economic future. Professor Bremmer explained three strategies for decision making that will carry businesses through crises, by focusing on stability, resilience, and relationships:
The kind of decision making that works when you know what’s likely to happen won’t suffice. Sustaining a business in uncertain times requires executives to prioritize stability, resilience, and relationship management. Underpinning all three is a shift in strategic direction—from a focus on growth above all else to a focus on having enough. You make your company prosper enough by maintaining and improving the quality and caliber of what you do. You decentralize your business enough so that the parts can be strong if the whole faces risk. And you maintain and improve the relationships that your business depends on enough by integrating them with your whole company. Developing these executive practices won’t shield you from crisis, but it will help ensure that when the dust settles, your company is not just standing, but moving forward.
To read the entire article, please click here.
The following is an excerpt from an op-ed published in the New York Times, written by NYU Stern Dean Peter Henry:
Because the economics profession failed to predict the financial crisis in advanced nations, critics claim that economists have little practical use and wield too much influence. In fact, the opposite is true. We need economists’ thinking now more than ever — provided we match the tools of economics to the proper task.
Economists who tailor their advice to ideology rather than reason earn their maligned status, contributing more noise to a political echo chamber. But economists also fail when they attempt to predict short-term business cycles, a task for which the discipline is ill equipped. By trying to time booms and busts the way meteorologists forecast weather, a handful of economists have generated unrealistic expectations about what they can and should do. Little surprise, then, that we’re caught in a public shouting match over why few, if any, economists called the end of the Great Moderation.
The dismal science works when economists adopt a modest stance and ply their craft as a forensic tool, using history and data to separate cycle from trend and demonstrate the power of sustained commitment to markets. Viewed through the longer-term lens of history, the most important economic event of the last three decades is not the unanticipated demise of the Great Moderation, but the turnaround that occurred in developing countries once their leaders adopted the advice of economists.
Read the full article as published in The New York Times.
The following is an excerpt from CNBC:
Now that the decision has been made in Washington to reset Cuban-American relations, it’s a good time for an outside perspective on where things may go from here. Bottom line: Cuba may well become a rising star in the region and an attractive economic partner for the U.S. if things are managed well. In financial terms, Cuba will be a “buy” when the time comes. A recent visit revealed some impressive strengths buried not far below the surface.
The Cuban experiment with Socialism was doomed from the start. It assured Cuba’s position at the nadir among the world’s economic underperformers. Cuba’s form of collectivism was abandoned long ago by almost all who attempted it – the attempt to improve social welfare by working against human nature rather than with it. You can push water uphill, but only by wasting enormous amounts of human and physical capital. And even people who are true believers will still try to do what’s best for themselves in their daily lives, regardless of any economic command and control structure.
Eleven million people, comparatively well educated, with unusually strong extended family ties and sufficient entrepreneurial vigor to be explosive once preoccupation with working around the “dead hand” of the state gradually fades away. The few sectors already liberalized show plenty of sprouts, like a long-vacant lot after a spring rain, suggesting the latent power of lifting price and wage controls sometime down the road – there’s a reason farmers, budding restauranteurs and taxi drivers are among the best-off Cubans today.
Read the full article published by CNBC
Excerpt - Making strategic investment decisions is not a task that should be taken haphazardly. Managers and MBA students spend time studying appropriate decision criteria such as net present value (NPV) to aid in making profit-maximizing decisions. However, in discussing investment decisions with practicing managers over the years, we sensed that managers often systematically deviated from profit maximization. In particular, we noticed that managers often equate changes in scaled profit measures (e.g., changes in return on investment [ROI]) with changes in total profits (i.e., marginal profits). This causes them to deviate systematically from profit maximization with respect to strategic investment decisions (e.g., research and development [R&D] investments, capital investments, acquisitions) by avoiding investments that increase total profits yet are less profitable than their average current investment. In other words, current levels of average profit create an anchor by which investments are assessed. This decision-making behavior, subtle but critical, was recently demonstrated by NYU Stern Management Professor Zur Shapira.
Professor Shapira, along with Carlson School of Management Professor J. Myles Shaver, devised studies that teased out this counter-productive pattern and described it in “Confounding Changes in Averages With Marginal Effects: How Anchoring Can Destroy Economic Value In Strategic Investment Assessments.”
Read the full paper here.
The following is an excerpt from USA Today:
Ever hear of the Altman Z-Score? If not, it’s time to start – just ask investors in Caesars Entertainment (CZR).
Caesars’ shares Thursday are down nearly 8% to $11.72 on news one of the casino operator’s units plans to file for Chapter 11 restructuring. It wasn’t a surprise to investors paying attention.
An easy-to-use financial measure, invented decades ago by New York University Stern School of business professor Edward Altman, was designed to be an early warning signal of companies in major trouble. Professional investors swear by the Altman Z-Score and the number has proved prescient, yet again. Oddly and regrettably, many individual investors don’t know about it – even though it was designed to make financial warnings available to all.
Read the full article here.
Risk Cooperative is a specialized strategy, risk and capital management firm founded around the question of what people would do in a world without risk? With this guiding principle, Risk Cooperative addresses the most pressing strategic questions of market expansion and innovation, strives to remove risk from management decisions and works to level the playing field for small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the capital markets. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., alongside the American Security Project, Risk Cooperative stands on three often separate disciplines of strategy, risk and investment, bringing them together as a part of our methodology to unlock value from risk.
Founded in 2014 by a team of risk, strategy and capital management executives, Risk Cooperative operates across a wide range of industries helping them gain access to global markets and innovate. Risk Cooperative is a licensed brokerage across the full spectrum of risk and insurance solutions.
Prior to forming Risk Cooperative, Mr. Disparte served as the managing director of Clements Worldwide, a leading insurance brokerage with customers in more than 170 countries. Mr. Disparte is a specialist in strategy and risk reduction through the design and delivery of comprehensive risk solutions of worldwide scope. He is credited with designing the world’s first card-based life insurance program for the United Nations, a plan that has placed more than a half billion USD of risk with the markets in more than 150 countries. This innovation was heralded as one of the top product innovations of 2011 by the MENA Insurance Review. Mr. Disparte serves as the chairman of the board of the Harvard Business School Club of Washington, D.C., and on Harvard Business School’s global alumni board. He is a founding member of the Business Council for American Security and an advisory member with the American Security Project.
Dante has also written recent pieces published in Foreign Policy Digest, The Hill blog and the American Security Project.
The following is an excerpt from an op-ed in American Banker written by Professors Ingo Walter and Roy Smith:
Of all the financial markets that should be resistant to manipulation, foreign exchange surely tops the list. With $5.3 trillion traded daily by thousands of buyers and sellers across the world, this should be one hyper-efficient market.
And yet six major banks recently agreed to a $4.3 billion settlement with U.S., U.K. and Swiss authorities over charges that the banks had failed to prevent traders from attempting to manipulate the market. In all three countries, it is possible that criminal charges against individuals may follow.
The settlement is the latest in a long line of massive legal actions that hold banks responsible for the activities of their employees. Prosecutorial efforts to hold shareholders liable for myriad problems that bank employees have caused seem to have no end in sight. The goal of these actions is to prompt boards and their managers to reform banking cultures. If banks want to avoid more floods of litigation in the future, they’ll have to act fast.
Read the full article here.
The following is an excerpt from Yahoo Finance:
In February of 2013, Nouriel Roubini, New York University professor and chairman of Roubini Global Economics, told Yahoo Finance that the U.S. was about to enter an asset bubble that would be “bigger than the one we had in 2003-06.” This was a huge departure for Roubini whose typically negative economic outlook earned him the affectionate nickname, Dr. Doom. Roubini’s general outlook was correct. Since February of 2013, the S&P 500 (^GSPC) has increased by nearly 39%.
But bubbles burst. So will we continue to see double digit returns in 2015? We’re currently in the mid-late stretch of this boom, “so next year we’ll see economic growth and easy money. This frothiness that we’ve seen in financial markets is likely to continue from equities to credit to housing,” says Roubini. He predicts an eventual crash, but not for at least a few years. He believes that valuations in some markets are already stretched and will continue to stretch until seeing a shakeout around two years down the line, in 2016.
Roubini is particularly worried about the increase in issuance of junk bonds. Low interest rates and an increased thirst for high-risk speculation have led to the junk bond market to being bigger than it ever has been. He also sees equities as a potential list, the P/E ratio is slightly above average but he thinks that tech and social media sector valuations are very stretched. “Throughout the world, we have low growth, low inflation and easy money. And where is liquidity going? Not in real credit or to the real economy, it’s leading to asset deflation,” he says.