Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM68079
Volume:
10 |
10 |
Oct 2026
Pages:
1-7
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Management Studies
BGS B-SCHOOL
Management Studies
BGS B-SCHOOL
The primary cause of the failures was a lack of liquidity for the banks that were unable to meet depositors' withdrawals, as the three banks and First Republic Bank had experienced credit losses in March and May of 2023. In this essay, the question is posed as to why these banks were fragile, and what changes following the crisis most directly tackle the fragility. It says that unrecovered interest-rate losses, stemming from the aggressive monetary tightening of 2022, and the high concentration, digital mobility and lack of insurance for deposits in banks with weak governance and supervision were responsible for the failures. Both conditions were satisfactory in themselves, but combined to create a run that was more rapid than liquidity conditions at the time were thought to be capable of handling. The essay discusses recent scholarship, as well as official reviews conducted by the Federal Reserve, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the Financial Stability Board and the Government Accountability Office, and the FDIC's alternative deposit insurance. It notes a general consensus on the importance of uninsured deposits and interest-rate risk; uncertainty over the extent of the vulnerability beyond the failed banks and whether the runs were basic or panic-related; and the absence of causal evidence related to the impact of regulation tailoring. The essay evaluates capital, liquidity, long-term debt, deposit insurance and supervisory reforms against the backdrop of their interaction, and finds that the interaction most directly affects liquidity readiness and deposit insurance design, and that measurement of capital should be included, though in part.
KEYWORDS
The failures in March 2023 can be better explained in terms of unfulfilled interest rate losses combined with the lack of runability in the deposit base and their extensive uninsured nature, as well as with regards to poor governance and supervision. The recent literature is unanimous that important risk exposures included uninsured deposits and risk to interest rates, but variable in scope on which banks were affected by the runs, and on whether the runs were fundamentally or panic-driven. If the vulnerability was not caused by one component alone, then “remedies” seem to be more likely to be effective if they improve the readiness of liquidity in addition to making changes to how capital is measured, and if they enhance the powers of supervisors to escalate cases. The predominant need for future research is the collection of causal empirical evidence of how the nature of regulation's tailoring and the nature of deposits affected banks' performance, to adjust regulatory reforms on the basis of a wider range of experience than the one in the current episode.
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. (2023). Report on the 2023 banking turmoil. Bank for International Settlements. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. (2023). Review of the Federal Reserve's supervision and regulation of Silicon Valley Bank. Cipriani, M., Eisenbach, T. M., & Kovner, A. (2024). Tracing bank runs in real time (Staff Report No. 1104). Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Cookson, J. A., Fox, C., Gil-Bazo, J., Imbet, J. F., & Schiller, C. (2023). Social media as a bank run catalyst. SSRN. Diamond, D. W., & Dybvig, P. H. (1983). Bank runs, deposit insurance, and liquidity. Journal of Political Economy, 91(3), 401–419. Drechsler, I., Savov, A., & Schnabl, P. (2017). The deposits channel of monetary policy. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), 1819–1876. Drechsler, I., Savov, A., Schnabl, P., & Wang, O. (2023). Banking on uninsured deposits (NBER Working Paper No. 31138). National Bureau of Economic Research. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. (2023). Options for deposit insurance reform. Financial Stability Board. (2023). 2023 bank failures: Preliminary lessons learnt for resolution. Government Accountability Office. (2023). Bank regulation: Preliminary review of agency actions related to March 2023 bank failures (GAO-23-106736). Jiang, E. X., Matvos, G., Piskorski, T., & Seru, A. (2024). Monetary tightening and U.S. bank fragility in 2023: Mark-to-market losses and uninsured depositor runs? Journal of Financial Economics, 159, Article 103899. Metrick, A. (2024). The failure of Silicon Valley Bank and the panic of 2023. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 38(1), 133–152.
Publication Date
10/17/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
1
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
6
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...