View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

September 1,1994

eOONOMIC
COMMeNTORY
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland

Banking and the Flow of Funds:
Are Banks Losing Market Share?
by Katherine A. Samolyk

Py some accounts, the 1980s was the
decade of both debt buildup and the decline and fall of the commercial banking
industry. Nonfinancial sector debt grew
substantially faster than national output
during this period and was mirrored by a
commensurate rise in financial intermediation. The commercial banking industry,
however, once the dominant type of intermediary, does not appear to have shared
in the proliferation of financial sector
activity. Funds advanced by U.S. commercial banks as a fraction of nonfinancial sector credit outstanding has declined
from 29 to 22 percent in the past 10 years.
Moreover, the trend within the industry is
widely characterized as one of consolidation: The number of commercial banks
has fallen from more than 15,000 in 1984
to fewer than 11,000 today.
Opinions differ on how to interpret the
evolving role of banks in the broader
financial sector.' One view is that the
increased competition from nonbank
financialfirmsreflects a diminishing need
for banks. Others argue that banks have
been hampered from competing by excessive regulation. However, few dispute the
perception that banks are losing market
share to other financial services providers.2
This Economic Commentary takes issue
with the notion that banks are declining in
importance by examining how they have
fared in their role as lenders.
By definition, a commercial bank makes
commercial and industrial (C&I) loans.
At year-end 1993, C&I loans accounted

for less than 18 percent of the total credit
extended to the nonfinancial business sector, versus more than 22 percent 30 years
ago. However, banks make other types of
loans — in particular mortgages and consumer loans — and in these markets they
are faring better. Indeed, in terms of overall borrowing by households and businesses, banks are directly funding nearly
the same share of credit as they did in the
early 1960s. Moreover, they are playing a
greater role in facilitating nonbank credit
market activity. Thus, although there are
substantially fewer banks today than a
decade ago, the industry appears to be far
from extinction.

• Banking versus Banks
Financial intermediation is the process
of pooling credit market claims on a set
of borrowers and funding them by issuing another set of claims to financial
investors. One distinguishing characteristic of banks in this process is that they
facilitate the monetary transactions
associated with settling these claims.
Commercial banks issue transactions
accounts that are easily used as a means
of payment, making them major players
in the U.S. payments system. Another
important feature of banks is that they
lend deposit funds to certain borrowers
who could not obtain credit as easily
elsewhere (if at all). These include
smaller, localized businesses and households that require costly screening and
monitoring. By developing expertise and
diversifying across many borrowers,
banks are able to reduce the attendant

Over the last decade, the media and
the public alike have expressed growing concern about the health of the
U.S. banking industry. Their fears are
centered on the decline in the share of
nonfinancial sector credit intermediated by banks and on the consolidation of the industry into fewer, but
larger, institutions. However, flow of
funds data indicate that banks today
account for nearly the same share of
outstanding household and nonfinancial business sector debt as they did
30 years ago.

costs of supplying credit to these segments of the economy.
Thus, the function of banking is generally associated with deposit taking that is
used to fund loan making. To the extent
that investors want to hold bank liabilities, banks can perform this lending
function. However, banks also intermediate some types of credit that involve
little banking in the traditional sense. For
example, a bank may invest its deposit
funds in U.S. government securities. In
this case, the government does not really
obtain credit from the bank. Rather, the
bank is buying securities that were
issued in (and could easily be resold in)
direct capital markets. Mutual fund managers as well as individual investors do
this very thing.

The distinction between a bank's lending
activities and its other investments is a
notable one. In the early 1950s, almost
half of the banking sector's portfolio was
invested in U.S. government securities.
Today, banks are doing significantly
more private sector lending, despite the
shift to funding securities witnessed over
the past several years.

FIGURE 1 TRENDS IN HOUSEHOLD
AND BUSINESS FINANCING
As a share of GDP
PANEL A: HOUSEHOLD SECTOR DEBT

• You Can't Tell the
Players without a Scorecard
Identifying the types of credit obtained
by households and businesses helps to
distinguish the markets where banks
compete as lenders. Household borrowing primarily takes the form of home
mortgages and consumer credit (such as
auto loans). Nonfinancial businesses
obtain credit in more numerous forms
that can be broadly categorized into
short-term and long-term sources of
funds. Shorter-term credit includes working capital loans from financial intermediaries as well as commercial paper
issued directly in capital markets by large
corporations. Long-term borrowing consists primarily of business mortgages on
commercial real estate and bonds that
firms issue directly in capital markets.
Over the past 40 years, the credit demands of businesses and households
have risen as the markets where banks
compete as lenders have expanded. The
panels in figure 1 illustrate the magnitude
of this credit growth by depicting the outstanding debt of each sector as a share of
GDP. The growth of household debt has
been accompanied by a shift toward
more mortgage borrowing (including
home equity loans). Trends in the composition of nonfinancial business sector
credit have been less marked. Short-term
debt has gained somewhat in importance,
while long-term debt continues to be
fairly evenly divided between business
mortgages and bond issues.
The box on the following page describes
the competition banks face as lenders
in these markets. Thrift institutions
(including savings and loans, credit
unions, and mutual savings banks) have
a long tradition as both consumer and
mortgage lenders. This industry is most
similar to the banking sector in terms of
its funding (deposits), regulations, and

0.0
1963

1968

1973

1978

1983

1988

1993

1983

1988

1993

As a share of GDP
0.7
PANEL B: NONFINANCIAL BUSINESS SECTOR DEBT

Short-term nonfinancial business debt

1968

1973

1978

SOURCE: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

decentralized structure. However, perhaps because thrifts have had more
problems than banks in the past decade,
other competitors are receiving greater
attention these days.
Finance companies have historically
been a vital source of credit to businesses
and households, funding their portfolios
in direct capital markets (as well as with
bank loans) rather than with deposits.
There is great deal of diversity within the
industry in terms of its lending activities,
as individual finance companies tend to
specialize in funding particular credit
niches.3 By diversifying across many
borrowers of a given type and developing expertise in transforming their risks,
finance companies can enhance the performance of their loan portfolios and
hence fund borrowers at a lower riskadjusted cost. Currently, the common
perception is that finance companies
have an advantage over banks because
they are less restricted in their activities
and incur fewer regulatory costs.

Banks are also facing heightened competition from direct credit markets. The
broadening of the commercial paper market in the last two decades has made it
cost effective for very large firms to obtain short-term business loans directly
from capital markets rather than from
banks. This market has also benefited
finance companies, as it has become a
dominant source of their funding and,
again, represents an alternative to borrowing from banks.
More recently, asset securitization has
spread as a means of funding certain
types of credit.4 Asset securitization (also
referred to as asset-backed lending) is the
process of pooling a large group of loans
and funding that pool by issuing commercial paper or bonds directly in capital
markets. Mortgage securitization by
government-sponsored agencies accounts
for much of the growth of the asset-backed
market. However, asset securitization is
also allowing other types of lending —

SOURCES OF FUNDS BY TYPE OF INVESTMENT
Sources of Funds
by Type of Instrument

Type of Financial
Intermediary

Primary "types of Credit
to Businesses and Households

Commercial banks

C&I loans
Business mortgages
Home mortgages
Consumer credit

Deposits

Thrifts

Home mortgages
Consumer credit
Business mortgages

Deposits

Finance companies

Business loans
Consumer credit
Home mortgages

Commercial paper
Bonds
Bank loans

Insurance companies and
pension funds

Corporate bonds
Business mortgages
Commercial paper
Home mortgages

Insurance premiums
and pension
contributions

Asset-backed
securities issuers

Home mortgages
Consumer credit
Business mortgages
Business loans

Commercial paper
Bonds

Government-sponsored
enterprises and
credit pools

Home mortgages
Business mortgages
Business loans

Agency securities

Bond mutual funds

Corporate bonds

Mutual fund shares

such as consumer credit — to be funded
directly in capital markets.
Financial intermediaries compete not
only in making loans but also in attracting investors. Commercial banks have
traditionally had a comparative advantage in funding their portfolios with
bank deposits because before 1980, they
alone were allowed to issue liquid transactions accounts. Given that banks were
also insured, they had unique access to a
relatively low-cost source of funds. However, the deregulation of depository institutions during the 1980s allowed thrifts
to issue the same types of accounts as
banks. In addition, the creation of money
market mutual funds in the early 1970s
provided small savers with another liquid
alternative to bank deposits.5
While banks are undoubtedly facing
more competition in providing deposittype accounts, investors also seem to be
shifting their portfolios toward the higheryielding capital-market-type instruments

that fund the nonbank competition. Tax
policies have created an incentive for
households to invest more of their wealth
in tax-deferred accounts issued by both
insurance companies and pension funds.
These longer-term funds hold longerterm investments (securities as well as
mortgages) as reserves against their future liabilities. High relative yields and
reduced transactions costs have also
boosted the popularity of bond and
stock mutual funds.

• Sizing Up the Competition
for Business Loans
Having identified the relevant markets
where banks compete, we can now turn
to examining how they have fared as
lenders during the past few decades. As
illustrated in figure 2, short-term credit
has increased somewhat as a source of
business financing and currently accounts for more than 35 percent of total
nonfinancial business sector debt outstanding. This compares to about 30 percent in the early 1960s. C&I lending by
banks, however, represents only 18 percent of total business borrowing, down
from 22 percent 30 years ago.

In terms of the short-term business
credit market itself, the declining prominence of banks is quite dramatic. Banks
now fund less than half of all short-term
business loans, versus around threequarters in the early 1960s. Finance
companies and the commercial paper
market have clearly gained in relative
market share.6 Hence, consistent with
popular wisdom, it appears that commercial banks have lost ground in their
traditional role of supplying working
capital to the nation's businesses.
In contrast, they appear to be gaining as
longer-term business lenders. Mortgages
on commercial real estate, farms, and
multifamily residential properties are the
major longer-term alternatives to borrowing directly in the bond market, and
banks have stepped up the pace of their
lending in this area.7 As indicated in figure 3, business mortgages held by commercial banks now account for more than
10 percent of total nonfinancial business
sector credit outstanding — up from
approximately 5 percent 30 years ago.
In terms of the business mortgage market
itself, commercial banks now directly
fund 36 percent of outstanding credit
(versus only 14 percent in the early
1960s). Most of this growth in market
share occurred during the commercial
real estate boom of the 1980s. Nonetheless, the industry has maintained a strong
presence despite the broad-based slowdown in commercial real estate lending
in the past several years. The success of
banks as business mortgage lenders
seems to be coming largely at the
expense of the thrift industry.
Thus, in terms of the nonfinancial business sector, commercial banks do not
appear to be relinquishing their prominence as lenders. In fact, C&I loans and
commercial mortgage lending now account for about 28 percent of total nonfinancial business sector debt — slightly
more than was the case 30 years ago.
Furthermore, the most recent data represent a period following a cyclical downturn in both business borrowing and bank
lending that by some accounts has yet to

percent of household sector debt — up
from around 9 percent 30 years ago. To
some degree, this trend reflects the
growth of mortgage-related borrowing
by households.

FIGURE 2 SHORT- TERM BUSINESS CREDIT
As a share of nonfinancial business sector debt

0.00 I
1963

1968

1973

1978

1983

1988

1983

1988

Still, in the home mortgage market itself,
commercial banks now hold about the
same share of outstanding loans as they
did in the early 1960s — albeit a share of
a much larger market. Banks have maintained this position in spite of the dramatic changes in residential mortgage
financing witnessed over the past several
decades. A much greater fraction of these
loans are now sold into the governmentsponsored secondary mortgage market,
where they are "liquefied" into pools and
funded by mortgage-backed securities.
Meanwhile, the thrift industry's share has
dwindled to the point that by year-end
1993, commercial banks actually held
more home mortgages than did thrifts.

FIGURE 3 BUSINESS MORTGAGES
As a share of nonfinancial business sector debt

1968

1973

1978

1993

a. Government-sponsored enterprises.
SOURCE: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

rebound. Banks do appear to be changing haw they lend to the business sector,
however. The shift from short-term
finance to mortgage lending should not
be that surprising, as business mortgage
lending requires the localized screening
and monitoring services viewed as the
forte of depository institutions. In this
arena, the banking industry has benefited
from problems in the thrift industry.
Recent data also indicate that asset securitization has yet to become a dominant
force in business loan markets.

• Banks as Competitors in
Household Credit Markets
Commercial banks also appear to be competing effectively in meeting the increasing credit needs of the household sector.
Banks have historically vied with thrifts
and finance companies (as well as with
nonfinancial retail businesses) in the consumer credit market. During the past decade, banks have fared better than these
competitors in the face of both the shift
in household borrowing from consumer
loans to mortgage-related obligations and
the growth of asset securitization.

As indicated in figure 4, the share of
household debt funded by banks in the
form of consumer credit has fallen from
around 13 percent to 9 percent over the
past three decades. However, to some
extent this decline mirrors the diminished importance of consumer loans as a
source of household sector financing. In
terms of the consumer credit market
itself, commercial banks hold around 46
percent of the debt outstanding — a
slightly larger share than they did in the
early 1960s. And while asset-backed
securities (backed, for example, by
credit card receivables or auto loans)
have become a viable means of financing consumer borrowing, securitization
appears to have impacted the market
share of finance companies (and thrifts)
more than that of banks.
Banks have also fared better than nonbank intermediaries in the expanding
residential mortgage market. Figure 5
depicts home mortgages by type of
holder as a share of total household debt
outstanding. Home mortgages held by
commercial banks now account for 12

Similar to trends in nonfinancial business lending, the total volume of mortgages and consumer loans held by banks
accounts for about the same share of
household sector debt as it did 30 years
ago. Unlike business credit markets,
asset securitization has become a prominent means of funding both types of
household borrowing. Thus, the commercial banking industry has maintained
its overall market share even as financial
innovations have cut into the business of
the traditional competition.

• Off-Balance-Sheet Banking
Though banks have responded to their
environment in part by changing the
types of loans they fund, another notable
trend in the industry is the growing
importance of the services banks provide
that are not reflected quite so directly on
their balance sheets. Some services do
not involve banking per se. For example,
banks are offering a fuller set of investment services to depositors (such as selling mutual fund shares) in order to earn
fee income and to attract or retain customers who desire one-stop financial
shopping. Other off-balance-sheet activities, while not identified specifically as
lending, involve banking in the sense
that they help borrowers obtain financing — albeit from other sources. A good
example of a credit service provided by

banks is loan origination. Although
pools of securitized mortgages and consumer credit are funded in direct capital
markets, commercial banks earn fee
income for originating and servicing the
loans in these pools.
Banks also earn fee income by issuing
promises of credit, credit guarantees,
and interest-rate hedges to business borrowers. These contractual arrangements
are known respectively as loan commitments, standby letters of credit, and
interest-rate swaps. A loan commitment
is simply a line of credit that can be
drawn down at the discretion of the borrower. A standby letter of credit is in
essence a promise to stand behind a
claim issued by a borrower. An interestrate swap is a contract in which the bank
promises to change the credit terms facing an existing borrower (for example,
from a variable-rate to a fixed-rate contract). These promises do not appear on
bank balance sheets as credit outstanding, because as long as they remain only
promises, no funds have been advanced.
Nevertheless, the promises have value,
since they increase the liquidity and
reduce the risk of the purchaser.
These off-balance-sheet services help
borrowers to obtain credit on better
terms, frequently from sources other
than the issuing banks. Indeed, the liquidity of commercial paper issues
(which help to fund finance companies,
asset securitization, and large corporations) to some extent reflects the credit
enhancements that banks issue to back
these claims. Thus, somewhat ironically,
the success of the nonbank competition
is at least partially due to the services
provided by banks.8
Currently, the volume of funds promised through loan commitments and
standby letters of credit represents about
one-third of banks' total on-balancesheet credit. Although it is difficult to
measure an amount of banking services
associated with these promises, looking
only at the flow of funds on bank balance sheets clearly understates the
weight of these institutions as lenders.9

FIGURE 4 CONSUMER CREDIT
As a share of household sector debt
0.35

0.00
1963

FIGURE 5 HOME MORTGAGES
As a share of household sector debt
0.7
GSEsa mortgage pools, and
asset-backed securities

1968

1973

1978

1983

1988

1993

a. Government-sponsored enterprises.
SOURCE: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

• Banking Sector Trends
and the Flow of Funds
A record number of bank mergers occurred in 1993. From a policy perspective, it is important to assess whether this
consolidation trend is indicative of an
industry in decline. Proponents of deregulation argue that the banking industry is
shrinking because excessive regulation
has created an uneven playing field on
which banks cannot compete with other
financial services providers. However,
current policies also yield advantages for
banks: The industry is subsidized and
protected by a federal safety net because
it is viewed as playing a pivotal role in
providing credit and facilitating payments.10 Still, some contend that banks
will not survive unless policymakers
grant them the power to expand into new
geographic and financial arenas.

This article does not attempt to sort out
how government policies versus market factors are influencing current
trends in the banking industry. It does,
however, document the extent to which
commercial banks continue to supply
credit directly to U.S. households and
nonfinancial businesses. Evidence from
aggregate data indicates that bank loans
account for nearly the same share of
these sectors' outstanding debt today
as they did 30 years ago. Thus, in terms
of what we see on balance sheets, banks
have not diminished in importance to
household and business borrowers.
Moreover, the shift in banking services
to off-balance-sheet activities indicates
that the share of credit directly funded
by banks understates their true market
share in providing services that help
borrowers obtain credit. Hence, while I
do not dispute the potential for prudent
banks to benefit from expanded powers, the claim that the industry will not
survive without them appears to
deserve greater scrutiny.

• Footnotes
1. For an overview of these perspectives, see David
C. Wheelock, "Is the Banking Industry in Decline?
Recent Trends and Future Prospects from a Historical Perspective," Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis,
Review, vol. 75, no. 5 (September/October 1993),
pp. 3-22.
2. For an exception, see John Boyd and Mark
Gertler, "Are Banks Dead, or Are the Reports
Greatly Exaggerated?" Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago, Proceedings of a Conference on Bank
Structure and Competition, May 1994 (forthcoming).
3. Some are captive funding vehicles for large conglomerates (Ford Capital Corp.), some are independent firms that extend credit to particular sectors
(Household Finance Corp.), and others are subsidiaries of bank holding companies that allow the
holding companies to broaden the scope of their
activities. For an informative description of the
industry, see Jane D'Arista and Tom Schlesinger,
"The Parallel Banking System," Economic Policy
Institute Briefing Paper, Washington, D.C., 1993.
4. For an overview of asset securitization trends, see
Charles T. Carlstrom and Katherine A. Samolyk,
"Securitization: More than Just a Regulatory Artifact," Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, Economic Commentary, May 1, 1992.
5. These accounts do not require deposit insurance
or its attendant regulatory costs because they fund
very liquid claims (such as Treasury bills, commercial paper, and large-denomination bank certificates
of deposit).

7. Household sector debt includes a small share of
what are classified as business mortgages, and business sector debt includes a small share of home
mortgages. Because it is not possible to identify
what fraction of an intermediary's business mortgages was issued to businesses (versus households),
I assume that business mortgages and home mortgages (issued by a given intermediary) are the liabilities of the business sector and the household sector,
respectively. The actual volume of the business sector's mortgage debt outstanding has been generally
quite close to the volume of business mortgages outstanding. Similarly, the volume of household sector
mortgages outstanding has tended to track fairly
close to that of home mortgages.

Katherine A. Samolyk is an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. The author thanks
Lydia K. Leovicfor helpful research assistance.
The views stated herein are those of the author
and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Cleveland or of the Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System.

8. This point has been made by others. For very
different interpretations of the policy implications,
see Boyd and Gertler (footnote 2) and D'Arista and
Schlesinger (footnote 3).
9. Boyd and Gertler (footnote 2) estimate an
adjusted bank share of intermediation by taking offbalance-sheet activities into account. Their estimates indicate that even in terms of total credit
flows (including government borrowing, for example), banks are not losing market share.
10. Yet, relatively recent experience has shown that
deposit insurance and the policy that a bank can be
too big to let fail allow large banks to take on substantial risks. In the past several years, banking legislation has attempted to mitigate the incentives for
excessive risk-taking by making banks pay for the
risks on their balance sheets.

6. Asset securitization remains a negligible source
of short-term working capital.

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
Research Department
P.O. Box 6387
Cleveland, OH 44101
Address Correction Requested:
Please send corrected mailing label to
the above address.
Material may be reprinted provided that
the source is credited. Please send copies
of reprinted materials to the editor.

BULK RATE
U.S. Postage Paid
Cleveland, OH
Permit No. 385