Sensitivity of Czech Commercial Banks to a Run on Banks

Open access


The aim of this paper is to thoroughly evaluate the sensitivity of Czech commercial banks to a run on banks. Our sample includes a significant part of the Czech banking sector in the period 2006-2013. We use three liquidity ratios that we stress via a stress scenario simulating a run on banks accompanied by a 20% withdrawal rate of deposits.We measure the impact of the scenario by the relative changes of these ratios. The results show that, in spite of a decrease in liquidity, most Czech banks would be able to finance such a scenario. The financial crisis influenced bank sensitivity to a run, but with a significant time lag. The severity of the impact of the bank run increases with the size of the bank; large banks are the most vulnerable. The resilience of banks is also determined by their strategy for liquidity risk management.

Allen, F.; Gale, D. (1998). Optimal Financial Crises. The Journal of Finance, 53(4), 1245-1284.

BIS. (1996). Amendment to the Capital Accord to Incorporate Market Risks. Basel: Bank for International Settlements.

BIS. (2000). Stress Testing by Large Financial Institutions: Current Practice and Aggregation Issues. Basel: Bank for International Settlements.

BIS. (2006). International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards. A Revised Framework. Basel: Bank for International Settlements.

Boss, M.; Fenz, G.; Krenn, G.; Pann, J.; Puhr, C.; Scheiber, T.; Schmitz, S. W.; Schneider, M.; Ubl, E. (2007). Stress Tests for the Austrian FSAP Update 2007: Methodology, Scenarios and Results. In Financial Stability Report, 68-92. Vienna: Oesterreichische Nationalbank.

Boss, M.; Krenn, G.; Schvaiger, M.; Wegschaider, W. (2004). Stress Testing the Austrian Banking System. Österreichisches Bankarchiv, 52(11), 841-852.

Breuer, T.; Krenn, G. (2000). Identifying Stress Test Scenarios. FachhochschuleVorarlberg and Oesterreichische Nationalbank Working Paper.

Bryant, J. (1980). A model of reserves, bank runs, and deposit insurance. Journal of Banking and Finance, 4(4), 335-344.

CNB. (2010). Financial Market Supervision Report 2009. Praha: Czech National Bank.

CNB. (2013). Financial Market Supervision Report 2012. Praha: Czech National Bank.

CNB. (2014). Core and encouraged financial soundness indicators (unconsolidated). Retrieved November 2, 2014, from

Diamond, D.; Dybvig, P. (1983). Bank runs, deposit insurance, and liquidity. Journal of Political Economy, 91(3), 401-419.

Freixas, X.; Rochet, J. C. (1997). Microeconomics of Banking. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Chu, K. H. (2011). Deposit Insurance and Banking Stability. Cato Journal, 31(1), 99-117.

Jurča, P.; Rychtárik, Š. (2006). Stress Testing of the Slovak Banking Sector. BIATEC, 14(4), 15-21

Kaufman, G. (1988). Bank Runs: Causes, Benefits and Costs. Cato Journal, 7(3), 559-595.

Komárková, Z.; Geršl, A.; Komárek, L. (2011). Models for Stress Testing Czech Banks’ Liquidity Risk. Working Paper Series of Czech National Bank, 11.

Komárková, Z.;Komárek, L.; Jakubík, P. (2012). Zranitelnost ceského bankovního sektoru. Studie národohospodárského ústavu Josefa Hlávky c. 10. Praha:Národohospodárský ústav Josefa Hlávky.

Krenn, G. (2001). Stress Testing by Austrian Banks. In Financial Market Stability Report, 108-116. Vienna: Oesterreichische Nationalbank.

Negrila, A. (2010). The Role of Stress-test Scenarios in Risk Management Activities and in the Avoidance of a New Crisis. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 17(2), 5-24

Rychtárik, Š. (2009). Liquidity Scenario Analysis in the Luxembourg Banking Sector. BCDL Working Paper, 41.

Van den End, J. W. (2008). Liquidity Stress-Tester:Amacro model for stress-testing banks’ liquidity risk. DNB Working Paper, 175.

Vodová, P. (2013). Liquidity risk of banks in the Visegrad Countries. An empirical analysis of bank liquidity, its determinants and liquidity risk sensitivity. Saarbrücken: Lambert Academic Publishing.

Journal Information

CiteScore 2017: 0.57

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.386
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.767


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 118 118 37
PDF Downloads 35 35 8