Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống
1
/ 42 trang
THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU
Thông tin cơ bản
Định dạng
Số trang
42
Dung lượng
1,41 MB
Nội dung
DefaultandtheMaturityStructurein So vereign Bonds
∗
Cristin a Ar ella no
†
University of Minnesota and
Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
Ananth Ramanaraya nan
‡
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
November 2008
Abstract
This paper s tu dies the matu rity composition andthe term structure of i nterest rate spreads
of gove rnm ent debt in emerging mark ets. Inthe data, wh en interest rate sp reads rise, d eb t
matu rity shortens andthe spread on short-term bonds is higher than on long-term bonds.
To account f o r this pa ttern, w e build a dyn am ic model of intern a tional borrow ing with
endogenous defaultand multiple maturities of debt. Short-term debt can deliver h igher
imm ed iate consum ptio n than long-term d eb t; la rge long-term lo an s are not available because
theborrowercannotcommittosaveinthenearfuturetowardsrepaymentinthefarfuture.
Howeve r, issuin g long -term debt can insure against the need to roll-over short-term debt
at high interest rate spreads. T h e trade-off between these two benefits is qua ntitatively
importan t for understanding thematurity composition in emerging ma rkets. W hen calibrated
to data from Brazil, the model matches the dynamics inthematurity of debt i ssu ances and
its como vement with the le vel of spreads across maturities.
∗
We thank V. V. Chari, Tim Kehoe, Patrick Kehoe, Naray ana Kocherlakota, Hanno Lustig, Enrique
Mendoza, Fabrizio Perri, and Victor Rios-Rull for many useful comments. The views expressed herein are
those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas, or the Federal Reserve System. All errors remain our own.
†
arellano@econ.umn.edu
‡
anan th.ramanarayanan@dal.frb.org
1 Introduction
Em erging markets f ace recurrent and costly financial c rises th at are characterize d by limited
access to credit and high interest rates on foreign debt. As crises approac h , not only is d eb t
limited but also thematurity of debt shortens, as docum ented by Broner, Lorenzoni, and
Schmukler (2007).
1
During these periods, however , the interest rate spread on short-term
bonds rises more than the spread on long-term bonds. Why do countries s horten their debt
maturity during crises ev en though spreads appear higher for shorter maturity debt? To
answer this question, this paper develops a dyna m ic model of the matu rity composition in
which debt prices reflect endogenous default risk and debt maturity responds to the prices
of short- and long-term debt contr acts. Our model can ration alize shorter debt m a turity
during crises as the result of a liquidity advantage in short-term debt contracts; although
these contracts carry higher spread s than longer term deb t, they can deliv er la rger resources
to the coun try in times of high default risk.
We first analyze the dynamics of thematurity composition of in ternational bonds and the
term structure of in terest rate spreads for four emerging m arket countries: Arg entina, Brazil,
Mexico, and Russia . We use data on prices and issuances of foreign-currency denom inated
bonds to estimate spread curves — interest rate spreads over U .S. Treasury bonds across
maturit y — as w ell as duration,ameasureoftheaveragetimetomaturityofpaymentson
coupon pa ying bonds. We find that governm ents issue short-term d eb t mor e heavily w hen
spreads are high and spread curves are down ward sloping, and they issue long-term debt
more heavily wh en sprea ds are lo w an d spread curves are upward slo ping. Across these four
countries, w ithin periods in which 2-y ea r spreads are belo w their 25th percentile, the average
duration of new debt is 7.1 y ears, andthe average d ifference bet ween the 10-yea r spread and
the 2 -yea r spread is 2.3 percenta ge points. But w hen the 2-year s pread s are abo ve their 75th
per centile, the average du ra tion s horte ns to 5 .7 years, while th e ave rage differ en ce bet ween
the 1 0-year spread andthe 2-year spread is −0.5 percentage points. From this evidence we
conclude that thematurity of deb t shortens in tim es of high spreads and do w nwa r d-slo ping
spread curves.
We then dev elop a dynamic model with defaultable bonds to study the c hoice of debt
matu rity and i ts co variation with t he term structure o f spreads. In ou r model, a risk averse
bo rrowe r faces persistent incom e sh oc ks an d ca n issue l on g a nd sh o rt d uration bonds. T h e
borrowercandefaultondebtatanypointintime,butfacescostsofdoingso. Default
1
Calvo and Mendoza (1996) document in detail how in Mexico during 1994, most of the public debt
was converted to 91-day Tesobonos. Bevilaqua and Garcia (2000) document a similar rise in short-term
government debt in Brazil during the 1999 crisis.
2
occ urs in equ ilibrium in low-income, high-debt times be cau se the cost of coupon paym ents
outweighs the co sts of default when con su m ption is low. Interest rate sp reads on lon g and
short bonds compensa te foreign len ders for the expected loss from future d efau lts. T hu s, t he
supply of credit is more string ent in time s of lo w income and high outstanding debt, becau se
the probability of default is high. In fact, cou nte rcyclica l default risk su bsta nt ially limits
the degree of risk sh aring, andthe model can generate cap ital outflows in r ecession s, when
in terest rate spreads are at t heir highest.
The model generates the observ ed dynamics of spread curv es because the endogenous
probab ility of default is persistent, yet mean rever ting, as a result of the dynamics of deb t
and income. Wh e n debt is lo w and income is h ig h, default is unlikely in th e near future, s o
spreads are lo w . H owe ver, long-terms spreads are higher than short-term spreads because
default m ay become likely inthe far future if t he borrower receives a sequence of bad shoc ks
and accum ulates debt. On the other hand, when income is low a nd debt i s high, default is
lik ely i n t he near future, so spreads are h igh . Lo ng-term spreads, ho wever, increa se by l ess
than short-term spread s becau se the borrowe r’s lik elihood of repa yin g may rise if it receives
a sequence of good shocks and red u ces its debt. Although cumu lative d efault p roba bilities
on long-ter m debt are a lways larger th an o n sh ort-term debt, the long spread can be lower
than the short spread because it reflects a lowe r a verage future default probability.
The m odel can rationalize the covariation observ ed in th e data between the maturit y
structure of debt issuances andthe term structure of spreads as reflectingatrade-off bet ween
insurance benefits of long-term debt and liqu i d it y benefits of short-term debt, both due to
the presence of default. Long-term deb t provides insurance against the uncertaint y o f short-
term interest rate spreads. Since short-term spreads rise during periods of low income, w hen
default risk is high, issuing long-term d eb t allow s the borro we r to avo id rollin g over sho rt-
term debt at high spreads in states when con sum p tion is low . Moreove r, long-term d eb t
insures against futur e periods of limite d credit availabilit y ; in particular, the borrowe r can
a void capital outflows in recessions by i ssuin g long-term debt.
Ev en though long debt dom inates short debt in term s of insurance, it is not as effective in
delivering high i mmediate consumption; hence the l iquidity benefit of sh ort-term debt. Short-
termdebtallowstheborrowertopledgemoreofhisfutureincometowarddebtrepayment
becau se in eac h subseq uent period the threat of default punishm ent gives him incentives for
repayment before an y further short debt is issued. Long-term debt contr acts do not allo w
suc h large transfers because the borrowe r is unable to commit to saving inthe near fu ture
to ward repa ym en t inthe further future. Effectively, th e threat of default pu nish m ent is lowe r
with long-te rm debt given th at it w ill be relevant o nly inthe fu tu re, when the lon g-te rm d eb t
3
is due. This greater efficacy of short-term debt in alleviating commitmen t problems for debt
repa yment is reflected in more lenien t price sc hedules and smaller drops in short-term prices
with in creases inthe lev el of debt issues. In th is sen se, sho rt d ebt is a more liqu id a sset, and
consum ptio n can alw ays be margin ally increased b y more with short-term debt than with
long-term deb t.
The time-varying maturitystructure responds to a time-varying valuation of thein surance
benefit of long-term debt andthe liquidity benefitofshort-termdebt.Periodsoflowdefault
probabilities and upward spread curves correspond to states when the borrower is wealthy
and values insurance. Thus, the portfolio is shifted to wa rd long debt. Periods of high defa ult
probabilities and inverted sprea d cur ves correspond to states when the borrower is poor and
credit is limited. Th ese are times when liquidity is most va lua b le , an d thus the portfolio
is shifted to ward shorter-term debt. We can therefore rationalize higher short-term debt
po sitions in times of crises as an optimal response to the illiquidity of long-ter m d ebt, and
the tigh t er availability of its supply.
W hen calibra ted to Brazilia n dat a, the mod el quantitatively m a tches the dyna m ics of the
matu rity compo sition of new d ebt issuances an d its co variation w ith spreads observe d in the
data. In connecting our model to the data, a me thodological contribution of the p aper is to
develop a tractable fram ewo rk with bonds that have empirically releva nt duration. Bonds in
our model are perpetuity contra cts w ith non-state-contingent cou pon pa ym ents that decay
at differe nt rates. B ond s with paym ent s that decay quick ly have more of their va lu e paid
early, and so have short dura tion. This gives a recursive structure to debt a ccu mu lation that
allows the model to be cha ra cteriz ed in t e rm s of a sm a ll nu mber of state variables although
decisions at any date are contingent on a long sequence of future expected payments. Our
findings indicate that the insurance benefits of long-term debt andthe liquidity benefits of
short-term debt are quantitatively important in understanding the dynamics of the m aturity
structure o b served i n Brazil. Importantly, the m a turity s tructur e inthe model responds to
the underly in g dy na mics of default pr ob a bilities re flected in spread curves, wh ich ma tch the
data well.
Rela ted L itera tur e
This paper is related to the literature on the optimal maturitystructure of government debt.
Angeletos (2002), B uera and Nicolini (2004) and Shin (2007) show that, when debt is not
state contingent, a rich m aturity structure of gov ernm en t bonds can be used to replicate
the allocations obtained w ith state-co nting ent deb t in econ om ies w ith distortiona ry taxes as
in Lucas a nd Stok ey (1983). In th ese closed econo my mod els, s hort- and long-ter m inter est
4
rate dynamics reflect the variation inthe representative a gent’s margin al rate o f substitutio n,
which changes with the state of the economy. Thus, ha ving a ric h enough maturity structure
is equivalent to ha vin g assets with state-contin gent pa yo ffs.
2
Our paper shares with these
papers the message that man aging th e m atu rity com position of debt can provide benefits to
the governm ent because of uncertain ty over fu tu re in terest rates. The message is particularly
relevant for the case of emergin g m arket econo mies. As N eum eyer a nd Pe rri (2005) have
sho wn, fluctuations in c ountry specific i nterest rate sp rea ds play a major r ole in a ccountin g
for the large business cycle fluctuations in emerging markets. T h e lesson th at our paper
prov id es in this con text is that the volatility of thematurity composition of debt in these
countries is an optimal response to these int erest rate fluctuatio ns. Ho wever, in c ontra st
to these papers, the fluctuation s in interest rates in o ur model reflect time variation in the
endogenous country’s o wn prob ability of default.
3
The maturity of d ebt in e m erg ing coun tries is also of interest because of the general
view that coun tries could alleviate their vulnerability to v er y costly crises by c h oosing the
appropriate maturity structure. For example, Cole and Kehoe (1996) argue that the 1994
Mexican debt crisis could ha ve been a voided if the maturit y of go vernm ent debt had been
longer. Long er mat urity debt would allow count ries to better man age external shocks and
sudden stops. Broner, Lorenzoni, and Schmu kler (2007) formalize this idea in a model where
the govern ment can avoid a crisis in th e s hort term by is suing l ong -term debt. In their model,
with risk a ver se lenders w h o face liquidit y s h oc ks, lon g -term debt is more expensive, s o the
maturity com position is the result of a trade-off between safer long -term d eb t and cheaper
short-term debt. In line with their paper, w e a lso find that short-term debt provid es larger
liquidit y benefits. In c ontrast to Bron er, L orenzoni, and Schmu kler, in our m odel the time-
varying availabilit y of short- a nd long-term deb t is a n equilibriu m respons e to compensate fo r
the economy’s default r isk, rath er th an to compensate for foreign lenders’ shock s. Moreover,
our paper is the first to develop a dynamic framework with defaulta ble debt and m ultiple
matu rities with which these questions can be analyzed and assessed quantitative ly.
The larger liquidity benefits of short-term debt relativ e to lon g -term debt arise in our
model because short-term contracts are more effectiv e in solving the commitm ent prob lem of
the borrower in term s of future debt anddefault policies. In this regar d, o u r paper is related
to Jeanne’s (2004) model where short-term deb t gives m ore incentive s for the gover nm ent
2
Lustig, Sleet, and Yeltekin (2006) develop a general equilibrium model with uninsurable nominal frictions
to study the optimal maturity of government debt. They find that higher interest rates on long-term debt
relative to short-term debt reflect an insurance premium paid by the government, for the benefits long-term
debt provides in hedging against future shocks.
3
The idea that credit risk makes longer term debt attractive is also present in Diamond (1991) in a three
period model of corporate debt where firms have private information about their future credit rating.
5
to implement better policies. Wh en short-term debt needs to be rolled o ver, creditors can
discipline the go vern ment b y rolling over the debt only after desired polic ies are implement ed .
4
Moreo ver, when defaulted debt is renegotiated, Bi (2007) shows th at long-term debt is more
expe nsive also to co m pensate for debt dilution. Absent explicit sen iority clau ses, issuin g
short-term debt can dilute the reco very of long-term debt in case of default.
The theoretical model in this p aper builds o n t he work of A guiar and Gopinath (2006) a nd
Arellan o (2008), w ho mode l e q uilibriu m default with incomplete marke ts, a s inthe seminal
paper on sovereign debt b y Eaton and G erso vitz (1981). This paper extends this framework
to incorporate lon g debt of multip le maturities. In recen t wo rk, Chatterjee and Eyigun gor
(2008) and Hatchondo and Martinez (2008) show that long-term defaultable debt allow s a
better fit of emerging market data in terms of the v olatility and mean of the coun try spread
as well as debt levels . All t hese models ge nerate a time - varyin g probability of d efault that is
linked to the dynamics of debt and income. The dynamics of the spread curv e in o ur model
reflect the time-varying default probab ility, in t he sam e way that Merton (1974) derived for
credit spread curves on defau ltable corporate bond s. In Merton’s model, w h en the exo genou s
default probability is low, the credit spread curve is up wa rd sloping, and w hen the default
probabilit y is hi gh, credit spread curves are downward sloping or hump shaped. The s pread
curve dyn am ics in t his p aper follow Merto n’s resu lts. Howe ve r, our framework d iffers from
Merton’s in that the probability of defaultandthe level andmaturity composition of debt
issuances are endogen ous variables.
The outline of the paper is as f o llows. Sect io n 2 documen ts the dynamics of the spread
curve and matu rity composition for four emerging markets: Argentina , Brazil, Mexico, a nd
Russia. Section 3 p resents the theor etical model. Section 4 presents so m e examp les t o
illustrate the mech anism for the optima l deb t portfolio. Section 5 p res ents all the quan titat ive
results, and Section 6 c onclu des.
2 Emerging M ark ets Bond Data
We examine data on sovereign bon ds issued inin terna tional financial mark ets b y four emerging-
market countries: A rgentina, Brazil, M exico, and Russia. We look at th e behavior of th e
in terest rate spreads over d efa ult-free bond s, across di fferen t maturities, and at the w a y the
matu rity of n ew debt issued covaries with spreads. We find that when spread s are low, g overn -
ments issue long-ter m bonds m ore heavily an d lon g-term spreads are higher than short-term
4
Commitment problems have been shown to reduce the level of sustainable debt inthe literature of
optimal policy without commitment, as in Krusell, Martin, and Rios-Rull (2006).
6
spreads. When spreads rise, thematurity of bond issuances shortens a nd short-term spr eads
are higher than long-term spreads. Our findin gs also confirm the earlier results of Broner,
Lorenzon i, and Schmu kler (2007), who showed in a samp le o f eight emerging eco nom ies tha t
debt maturit y shortens when spreads a re v ery high.
5
2.1 Spread Curv es
We define the n-year sp read fo r an emerging market count ry as the difference between the
yield o n a d efaulta ble, zer o-coupon bond maturing in n years i ssu ed by the count ry and on
a zero-coupon bo nd of the same matu rity with negligible default risk (for example, a U.S.
Treasury note). The spread is the implicit interest rate premium required b y investors to
be willing to purchas e a defaultable bond of a given ma tur ity.
6
The spre ad curve depicts
spreads as a function of maturity.
We denote the ann ually com pounded yield at date t on a zero-coupon bond issued b y
country i,maturinginn years, as r
n
t,i
. The yield is related to the price p
n
t,i
of an n-y ea r
zero-coupon bond, wi th face value 1, through
p
n
t,i
=(1+r
n
t,i
)
−n
. (1)
We define country i’s n-year spread as the differ ence in zero-coupon yields betwe en a
bo nd issued b y country i relative to a default-free bond. The n-year spread for coun try i at
date t is given by: s
n
t,i
= r
n
t,i
− r
n
t,rf
,wherer
n
t,rf
is the yield of a n-year defau lt-free bon d .
7
Since governments do not issue zero-coupon bonds i n a wide range of maturities, we
estimate a country’s spread curve by using secondary market data on the prices at whic h
coupon-bearing bonds trade. The estimation procedure, described inthe Appendix, follows
Svensson (1994) and Broner, Lorenzon i, and Schmukler ( 2007 ).
We comp ute spread s starting in M arch 19 96 at the earliest and e nding in M ay 2 004 at th e
latest, dependin g on th e availability of data for each co untry. Figure 1 displays the estim ated
spreads f or 2-year and 1 0-y ear bonds for A rgentina, Brazil, Mexico, and Russia.
5
Broner, Lorenzoni and S chmukler (2007) focus on the relationship betw een the term structure of risk
premia (compensation for risk aversion) andthe average maturity of debt. In this section we construct
measures of the t erm structure of yield spreads and t he average duration of debt because these statistics
prov ide the basis for the quantitative assessment of our model.
6
Yield spreads on bonds issued by emerging markets could also arise due to risk premia or liquidity
differences. However, g iven the incidence of sovereign defaults in emerging markets, in o ur model we abstract
from these other factors and examine the extent t o which default risk can rationalize t hese spread dynamics.
7
Our data include bonds denominated in U.S. dollars and European currencies, so we take U.S. and
Euro-area government bond yields as default-free.
7
96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
date
spread (%)
Argentina
96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
date
spread (%)
Brazil
96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
date
spread (%)
Mexico
96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
date
spread (%)
Russia
2 year
10 year
Figure 1: Tim e series o f 2-year and 10-year spreads.
Spreads are v ery v olatile, andthe difference between long-term and short-term spr eads
va ries substan tially over time. W hen spreads are low, long-term spreads are generally h igher
than short-term spreads. Howe ver, w h en the level o f spreads rises, the gap betwe en long and
short-term spreads tends to n arrow and sometimes reve rses; the spread curv e is flatter or
inverted. The tim e series in Figure 1 show sharp in crea ses in interest ra te spreads associated
with R u ssia ’s de fault in 1998, Argentin a’s defaultin 2001, and Braz il’s financial crisis in
2002.
8
The expectation that the countries w o uld defaultin these episodes is reflectedinthe
high spreads charged on de faultable bonds.
To em ph asize the pattern observed inthe time series that sho rt-term spreads tend to rise
more than long-term spreads, in Figure 2 we display spread curv es a veraged across different
8
For Argentina and Russia, we do not report spreads after d efault on external debt, unless a restructu ring
agreement was largely completed at a later date. We use dates taken from Sturzenegger and Zettelmeyer
(2005). For Argentina, we report spreads until the last week of December 2001, when the country defaulted.
The restructuring agreement for external debt was not offered until 2005. For Russia, we report spreads un til
the second week of August 1998 and beginning again after August 2000 when 75% of external debt had been
restructured.
8
time periods for each country: the overall avera ge, the a vera ge w ithin periods with t he 2-yea r
spread belo w its 1 0th percentile, andthe a ve rage within periods with t he 2 -year sp read above
its 9 0th percen tile. When spreads are lo w, the spread curve is up ward sloping: long-term
spreads are higher than short-term spreads. Wh en spreads are high, short-term spreads rise
more than l ong-term spreads. For A rgen tina, Brazil, a nd R ussia, the spread curve becomes
do wnward sloping in these tim es. For M exico, which had relatively smaller in creases in
spreads during this time period, the spread curv e flattens as short spreads rise more than
long spreads.
9
2.2 TheMaturity Composition of Debt and Spreads
We no w examine thematurity of new debt issued by the four emerging mark et economies
during the s ample period, and relate t he changes in t he maturity of debt to changes in
spreads.
10
In each week inthe sample, we measure the m atu rity of debt as a q u antity-we ighted
a verag e maturity of bonds issu ed that week. We measure thematurity of a bond using two
alternativ e statistics. T h e first is simply the number of y ears from the issue date until the
maturity date. The second is the bond’s duration,defined in M acaulay ( 1938) as a weighted
a verage o f the nu mber of years until each of the bond’s future payments. A bond issued at
date t by country i,payingannualcouponc at dates n
1
,n
2
, n
J
years into the future, and
face value of 1 has d uration d
t,i
(c) defined by
d
t,i
(c)=
1
p
t,i
(c)
Ã
J
X
j=1
n
j
c(1 + r
n
j
t,i
)
−n
j
+ n
J
(1 + r
n
J
t,i
)
−n
J
!
, (2)
where p
t,i
(c) is the coupon bond’s price, and r
n
t,i
is the zero-co upon yield curve. Th e time
until each future p ay m e nt is weig hted by the discounted value of that pay m ent rela tive to th e
price of the bond. A zero-coupon bond has duration equal to the number of years until its
maturity da te, but a coupon-paying bond m aturing on t he s ame d ate h as shorter dura tion.
We consid er duration as a measure of m atu rity because i t is m ore comparable a cross bonds
9
The findings are similar to empirical findings on spread curves in corporate debt markets. Sarig and
Warga ( 1989), for example, find that highly rated corporate bonds have low levels of spreads, and spread
curves that are flat or upward-sloping, while low-grade corporate bonds have high levels of spreads, and
average spread curves that are hump-shaped or downward-sloping.
10
In addition to external bond debt, emerging countries also have debt obligations with multilateral
institutions and foreign banks. However, marketable debt constitutes a large fraction of the external debt.
The average marketable debt from 1996 to 2004 is 56% of total external d ebt in Argentina, 59% in Brazil,
and 58% in Mexico (Cowan et al. 2006).
9
5 10 15 20
0
5
10
15
20
25
Argentina
years to maturity
spread (%)
5 10 15 20
0
5
10
15
20
25
Brazil
years to maturity
spread (%)
5 10 15 20
0
5
10
15
20
25
Mexico
years to maturity
spread (%)
5 10 15 20
0
5
10
15
20
25
years to maturity
spread (%)
Russia
average
high short spread
low short spread
Figure 2: Av erage s pread c urves: over all, and w ith in periods in th e h igh est an d lowest deciles
of the 2 -year spread.
with differen t coupon rates.
We calculate the a vera ge ma tur ity and avera ge dur ation of new bonds issued in each
week b y eac h country. Table 1 displays eac h country’s averages of th ese weekly maturit y
and duration series within periods of high (above median) and low (below med ia n) 2-y ea r
spreads.
First, the table shows that duration tends to be much shorter than maturity. Because the
yield on an e m erg ing market bond i s ty p ically high, the p r incipa l pay m e nt at the matu rity
date is severely d iscou nted, and much o f the bond’s value comes fr om coupon payments made
soon er inthe future. This weig ht o n coupon pa ym ents shortens th e d uratio n measure relative
10
[...]... bL , y) is the value associated with not defaulting and staying inthe contract and v d (y) is the value associated with default Since we assume that default costs are incurred whenever the borrower fails to repay its obligations in full, the model will only generate complete default on all outstanding debt, both short and long term When the borrower defaults, output falls to y def , andthe economy... yet 2 the borrower issues long-term debt The lower discount price on long debt is the insurance premium the borrower is willing to pay for insurance against the variation in bond prices in period 1 This insurance mechanism is the same as that emphasized in Kreps (1982), Angeletos (2002) and Buera and Nicolini (2004) in their models of the optimal maturitystructure of debt with incomplete markets The. .. model contains a dynamic portfolio problem where the borrower chooses holdings of two defaultable bonds of shorter and longer duration Below, we show how movements inthe probability of default generate time-varying differences inthe prices, andinthe liquidity and insurance benefits of these two assets, which rationalize the movements in spread curves andmaturity composition observed inthe data 5.2.1... is low The economy borrows a large amount at low interest rate spreads, so that in states where the economy is hit by a bad shock, default becomes more likely further inthe future In contrast, when the likelihood of imminent default is high, the economy avoids defaultinthe next period only in states with high output Conditional on not defaulting, then, output is expected to remain high, andthe probability... in our model is that the variation in bond prices comes from the government’s inability to commit to repaying, rather than from variation inthe lender’s marginal rate of substitution 4.3 Summary In a standard incomplete markets model with fluctuating output and without default, a borrower would find the portfolio of long and short debt indeterminate if the risk-free rate were constant across time; the. .. of default further inthe future falls The persistence and mean reversion of defaultand repayment probabilities driven by the dynamics of debt and income therefore rationalize the dynamic behavior of the spread curve observed inthe data 5.2.2 Maturity Composition We now present the quantitative predictions for thematurity composition of debt It is important to note that we analyze the optimal maturity. .. On the other hand, when wealth is low, the short spread is on average 10.84% andthe long spread is on average 2.43% below the short spread In summary, through the lens of our model, thematuritystructure of defaultable debt in emerging markets and its covariation with spread curves and levels can be rationalized by two factors: hedging advantage of long-term debt for insuring against fluctuations in. .. high and low short spreads, as well as the difference in volatilities of the two spreads The model also matches quantitatively the volatility of the long spread The model’s overall average short and long spreads, however, are both pinned down by the average probability of default, so the average spread curve is quite flat Underlying the time-varying spreads is the interaction of the dynamics of income and. .. when the two-period loan is due does not induce the borrower to repay, because the borrower discounts the future, so that reducing consumption in period 1 is worse than facing the punishment for defaultin period 2 At the same time, the threat of punishment for defaultin period 1 is irrelevant, because none of the debt is due in period 1, andthe threat of punishment cannot be used to induce savings... 2 b1 = 0 1 In this example the borrower faces risk because of the variation in bond prices across states in period 1 due to differences indefault risk in period 2 Using long-term debt in period 0 allows the borrower to avoid the risk involved with rolling over short-term debt in period 1 The borrower benefits from this insurance with smoother consumption and higher utility 1 2 Note that in period 0 . iven the incidence of sovereign defaults in emerging markets, in o ur model we abstract
from these other factors and examine the extent t o which default. defaulting and sta yin g in the contra ct and
v
d
(y) is the value associated with default.
Since we assume that default costs are incurred w henever the