Nondilutive CoCo Bonds: A Necessary Evil?
研究了银行偏好发行非稀释性CoCo债券的原因，发现稀释性CoCo虽能抑制事前风险，但会引发事后风险转移，而非稀释性CoCo对高杠杆银行更优，监管者可通过资本监管引导设计。
Abstract Banks predominantly issue nondilutive CoCos, contrary to the suggestion that CoCos should be dilutive to reduce risk-taking. In an agency model of two moral hazards, we show that, although dilutive CoCos deter ex ante risk-taking and prevent banks from being undercapitalized, penalizing shareholders of a distressed bank with dilution leads to ex post risk-shifting. CoCos’ design and risk implications depend on bank capitalization: equity-constrained banks prefer nondilutive CoCos because they maximize the financing capacity by tackling ex post risk shifting only. Nondilutive CoCos can be used to implement the constrained social optimum for highly leveraged banks, and regulators can induce appropriate CoCo designs with capital regulations.