Diversification in the Financial Services Industry: The Effect of the Financial Modernization Act : The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy

Editor-in-Chief: Jürges, Hendrik / Ludwig, Sandra

Ed. by Auriol , Emmanuelle / Brunner, Johann / Fleck, Robert / Mendola, Mariapia / Requate, Till / Zulehner, Christine / Schirle, Tammy


IMPACT FACTOR 2015: 0.250
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.825

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.501
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.418
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.455

Online
ISSN
1935-1682
See all formats and pricing

 


Select Volume and Issue
Loading journal volume and issue information...

Diversification in the Financial Services Industry: The Effect of the Financial Modernization Act

Faith R. Neale1 / Pamela Peterson Drake2 / Steven P. Clark3

1University of North Carolina at Charlotte,

2James Madison University,

3University of North Carolina at Charlotte,

Citation Information: The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy. Volume 10, Issue 1, ISSN (Online) 1935-1682, DOI: 10.2202/1935-1682.2266, March 2010

Publication History

Published Online:
2010-03-08

Abstract

The intent of the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (FSM) was to strengthen the overall financial services sector by allowing financial firms to diversify across industries within the financial sector. Similar to other studies of the reaction to this Act, we observe that investors consider the FSM to be good news. More interestingly, we also observe that systematic risk increased for some types of firms, but decreased for others as barriers were lowered. This finding is consistent with the idea that the reduction of regulation may increase systematic risk, but that the effects of deregulation on risk may be mitigated by anticipated effects of diversification. Specifically, bank holding companies that chose to diversify into other financial industries experienced increases in systematic risk while those that did not diversify realized decreases in systematic risk. Overall, we find that the systematic risk of financial firms converged and increased in the past few years as firms expanded into non-traditional businesses. In addition, we find that the Act reduced systematic risk for some firms, specifically those that diversified their product lines with insurance products.

Keywords: deregulation; Financial Services Modernization Act; Glass-Steagall; Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act; financial services industry

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
John A. Doukas and Wenjia Zhang
Review of Behavioural Finance, 2015, Volume 7, Number 1, Page 2
[2]
Darren Filson and Saman Olfati
Journal of Banking & Finance, 2014, Volume 41, Page 209

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.