Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Fundamentals or Panic: Lessons from the Empirical Literature on Financial Crises

25 Pages Posted: 27 Oct 2010 Last revised: 7 Dec 2011

Itay Goldstein

University of Pennsylvania - The Wharton School - Finance Department

Date Written: October 26, 2010

Abstract

There are two basic approaches to explaining financial crises. One argues that they are driven by bad fundamentals, while the other one argues that they reflect panic or coordination failures among investors. The empirical literature has established a fairly strong link between fundamentals and crises, suggesting support for the fundamental-based view and not for the panic-based view. However, in theory, the two approaches are not mutually exclusive: the link between fundamentals and crises does not go against the validity of the panic-based view. In fact, there are models that predict panic to be triggered by low fundamentals. The article reviews empirical evidence in the financial-crises literature in light of the tension between the fundamental-based and panic-based approach. It points out the limited ability to draw conclusions on the validity of the panic-based approach and describes possibilities for identifying panic in the data.

Keywords: Financial Crises, Panic, Fundamentals, Bank Runs, Currency Attacks, Contagion, Twin Crises, Global Games, Identification of Strategic Complementarities

Suggested Citation

Goldstein, Itay, Fundamentals or Panic: Lessons from the Empirical Literature on Financial Crises (October 26, 2010). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1698047 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1698047

Itay Goldstein (Contact Author)

University of Pennsylvania - The Wharton School - Finance Department ( email )

The Wharton School
3620 Locust Walk
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States
215-746-0499 (Phone)

Paper statistics

Downloads
255
Rank
100,627
Abstract Views
1,123