Market power and liquidity creation: Size heterogeneity and risk absorption
Authors
-
Vu Huu Thanh
thanh.vh@ou.edu.vn
Ho Chi Minh City Open University, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Namhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2306-2565
DOI:
10.46223/HCMCOUJS.econ.en.16.3.5407.2026Keywords:
bank size; Lerner index; liquidity creation; market powerJEL Classification:
G21; G28; E44Abstract
This study examines the relationship between market power and liquidity creation in Vietnam, focusing on whether this relationship varies across bank size classes. Using an unbalanced panel of 28 Vietnamese commercial banks over the period 2008 - 2024, we measure liquidity creation following the methodology of Berger and Bouwman (2009) and capture bank-level market power through the Lerner index derived from a translog cost function. Because the Lerner index is an inverse measure of competition (higher values indicate greater market power), we frame hypotheses and interpret coefficient signs in terms of market power throughout. Employing the dynamic generalized method of moments (GMM) estimation, we first establish the baseline effect of market power on liquidity creation, then test whether bank size moderates this relationship. The results confirm that market power has a positive and significant effect on liquidity creation, consistent with the risk absorption hypothesis. The interaction term between market power and the large-bank dummy is positive and significant, indicating that the positive effect of market power on liquidity creation is approximately 2.3 times stronger for large banks than for small banks. These findings carry policy implications for the State Bank of Vietnam regarding the design of competition policies that account for structural differences across bank size categories.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.References
Allen, F., & Gale, D. (2004). Financial fragility, liquidity, and asset prices. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2(6), 1015-1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2004.00525.x
Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
Beck, T., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2004). Bank competition and access to finance: International evidence. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 36(3), 627-648.
Berger, A. N., & Bouwman, C. H. (2009). Bank liquidity creation. Review of Financial Studies, 22(9), 3779-3837. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhn104
Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8
Boot, A. W., & Thakor, A. V. (2000). Can relationship banking survive competition? The Journal of Finance, 55(2), 679-713. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00223
Carbó-Valverde, S., Rodriguez-Fernandez, F., & Udell, G. F. (2009). Bank market power and SME financing constraints. Review of Finance, 13(2), 309-340. https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfn028
Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00048-6
Dang, V. D. (2020). Do non-traditional banking activities reduce bank liquidity creation? Evidence from Vietnam. Research in International Business and Finance, 54, Article 101257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2020.101257
Windmeijer, F. (2005). A finite sample correction for the variance of linear efficient two-step GMM estimators. Journal of Econometrics, 126(1), 25-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2004.02.005
Diamond, D. W., & Dybvig, P. H. (1983). Bank runs, deposit insurance, and liquidity. The Journal of Political Economy, 91(3), 401-419. https://doi.org/10.1086/261155
Diamond, D. W., & Rajan, R. G. (2001). Liquidity risk, liquidity creation, and financial fragility: A theory of banking. Journal of Political Economy, 109(2), 287-327. https://doi.org/10.1086/319552
Distinguin, I., Roulet, C., & Tarazi, A. (2013). Bank regulatory capital and liquidity: Evidence from US and European publicly traded banks. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37(9), 3295-3317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2013.04.027
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Horvath, R., Seidler, J., & Weill, L. (2016). How bank competition influences liquidity creation. Economic Modelling, 91(3), 401-419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10693-013-0164-4
Vu, T. H., & Ngo, T. T. (2023). Bank capital and bank stability: The mediating role of liquidity creation and moderating role of asset diversification. Cogent Business & Management, 10(2), Article 2208425. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2208425
Jayaratne, J., & Strahan, P. E. (1998). Entry restrictions, industry evolution, and dynamic efficiency: Evidence from commercial banking. The Journal of Law and Economics, 41(1), 239-274. https://doi.org/10.1086/467390
Jiang, L., Levine, R., & Lin, C. (2019). Competition and bank liquidity creation. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 54(2), 513-538. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022109018000820
Keeley, M. C. (1990). Deposit insurance, risk, and market power in banking. The American Economic Review, 80(5), 1183-1200.
Koetter, M., Kolari, J. W., & Spierdijk, L. (2012). Enjoying the quiet life under deregulation? Evidence from adjusted Lerner indices for US banks. Review of Economics and Statistics, 94(2), 462-480. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00155
Love, I., & Martínez Pería, M. S. (2015). How bank competition affects firms' access to finance. The World Bank Economic Review, 29(3), 413-448. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhu003
Nguyen, T. T. H., Phan, G. Q., Wong, W.-K., & Moslehpour, M. (2023). The influence of market power on liquidity creation of commercial banks in Vietnam. Journal of Asian Business and Economic Studies, 30(3), 166-186. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABES-06-2021-0076
Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 49(6), 1417-1426. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911408
Pesaran, M. H. (2015). Testing weak cross-sectional dependence in large panels. Econometric Reviews, 34(6-10), 1089-1117. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474938.2014.956623
Petersen, M. A., & Rajan, R. G. (1995). The effect of credit market competition on lending relationships. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(2), 407-443. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118445
Roodman, D. (2009). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The Stata Journal, 9(1), 86-136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0900900106
Sarafidis, V., & Robertson, D. (2009). On the impact of error cross‐sectional dependence in short dynamic panel estimation. The Econometrics Journal, 12(1), 62-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368-423X.2008.00260.x
State Bank of Vietnam. (2023). Annual report 2022. https://www.sbv.gov.vn/en/web/sbv_portal/w/annual-report-2022
Toh, M. Y., Gan, C., & Li, Z. (2019). Revisiting the impact of stock market liquidity on bank liquidity creation: Evidence from Malaysia. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 55(8), 1776-1802. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2018.1496420
Tran, V. T., & Nguyen, H. (2024). Competition, liquidity creation and bank stability. Accounting & Finance, 64(2), 2111-2146. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.13212
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
Downloads
Additional Files
Received: 06-02-2026Accepted: 13-04-2026Published: 03-05-2026Statistics Views
Abstract: 145 PDF: 3 Appendix: 0How to Cite
Vu, H. T. (2026). Market power and liquidity creation: Size heterogeneity and risk absorption . HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF SCIENCE - ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, 16(3), 144–160. https://doi.org/10.46223/HCMCOUJS.econ.en.16.3.5407.2026License
Copyright (c) 2026 Vu Huu Thanh

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
