跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.06514 · v1

An Interaction-Aware Decision Framework for FDIC-Assisted Distressed Bank Acquisitions: Empirical Evidence from the FDIC Failed-Bank Panel and the SVB-First Citizens Case

首次提交 2026-11-04 21:41
版本更新 2026-11-04 21:41
雷达观测 2026-11-05 12:13
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Acquirers of failed banks weigh acquisition value, regulatory protection, risk, buyer strength, and execution difficulty jointly, because each signal's meaning depends on the others: high non-performing loans matter less when government loss sharing absorbs the losses. The proposed Spider Network Filtering Framework encodes such dependencies as four interpretable interaction rules among five dimensions, yielding graph-inspired features for a logistic model and a Pursue/Caution/Avoid decision rule. We evaluate it on 55 acquisitions assisted by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 2008-2024 by acquirers with a parent listed in the United States. Six financial inputs come from regulatory reports published before each failure; two deal terms, which the winning bidder knows when it bids but investors learn at the announcement, come from the regulator's press releases. The outcome, a positive three-day abnormal return around the announcement, records the market's initial reception, not realized success. Under grouped, nested cross-validation, the Spider-enhanced model reaches a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.594, against 0.615 for logistic regression on the same inputs and 0.632 for ridge regression; permutation tests that repeat the full model selection give at most weak evidence that any of them ranks better than chance. The Spider score used directly does not rank better than chance, and an apparent link between target distress and higher returns disappears against a bank-sector benchmark. Thresholds tuned for the F1 score approve most acquisitions with negative returns and realize negative utility when each costs three times what a positively received acquisition gains.

作者备注:18 pages, 2 figures, 15 tables. Research code, datasets, and reproducibility materials are available at https://github.com/malihealiasgari20/FDIC-SNFF-Decision-Framework

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-04 21:41 · 最新观测版本

An Interaction-Aware Decision Framework for FDIC-Assisted Distressed Bank Acquisitions: Empirical Evidence from the FDIC Failed-Bank Panel and the SVB-First Citizens Case

Acquirers of failed banks weigh acquisition value, regulatory protection, risk, buyer strength, and execution difficulty jointly, because each signal's meaning depends on the others: high non-performing loans matter less when government loss sharing absorbs the losses. The proposed Spider Network Filtering Framework encodes such dependencies as four interpretable interaction rules among five dimensions, yielding graph-inspired features for a logistic model and a Pursue/Caution/Avoid decision rule. We evaluate it on 55 acquisitions assisted by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 2008-2024 by acquirers with a parent listed in the United States. Six financial inputs come from regulatory reports published before each failure; two deal terms, which the winning bidder knows when it bids but investors learn at the announcement, come from the regulator's press releases. The outcome, a positive three-day abnormal return around the announcement, records the market's initial reception, not realized success. Under grouped, nested cross-validation, the Spider-enhanced model reaches a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.594, against 0.615 for logistic regression on the same inputs and 0.632 for ridge regression; permutation tests that repeat the full model selection give at most weak evidence that any of them ranks better than chance. The Spider score used directly does not rank better than chance, and an apparent link between target distress and higher returns disappears against a bank-sector benchmark. Thresholds tuned for the F1 score approve most acquisitions with negative returns and realize negative utility when each costs three times what a positively received acquisition gains.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗