new approaches for payment system simulation research
DESCRIPTION
The presentation looks at the importance topology of interactions in payment system and the behavior of banks in the systemTRANSCRIPT
New approaches for payment system simulation research
Kimmo Soramäki
www.soramaki.net
www.financialnetworkanalysis.com
TKK, Helsinki, 3.9.2007
Payment systems
• All economic and financial activity necessitates payments
• Payments need to be settled somehow
• Payments can be intra-bank or interbank – For the latter: need for a payment system
• Interbank payments account to ~3 trillion a day in US = 80 times the GDP on annual level
• Efficient and safe interbank payment systems are important for– Efficient financial markets– Financial stability– Monetary policy
• Settling payments requires liquidity, which is costly– In US liquidity worth ~3% of daily flows are used for settlement, i.e. daily speed
of circulation is ~33.
Papers
• Soramäki, Kimmo, M.L. Bech, J. Arnold, R.J. Glass and W.E. Beyeler (2007). "The Topology of Interbank Payment Flows". Physica A. Vol. 379.
Models payment flows among banks as graphs (“topology”)
• Beyeler, Walter, M.L Bech, R.J. Glass, and K. Soramäki (2007). "Congestion and Cascades in Payment Systems". Physica A. Forthcoming.
Models the coupling of payment flows and flow dynamics (“physics”)
• Galbiati, Marco and Kimmo Soramäki (2007). “Dynamic model of funding in interbank payment systems ”. Bank of England Working Paper. Forthcoming.
Models bank decision-making (“behavior”)
Payment system is modeled as a graph of liquidity flows (links) between banks (nodes)
“Topology”
Fedwire liquidity flows
Fedwire liquidity flows share many of the characteristics commonly found in other empirical complex networks - scale-free (power law) degree distribution - high clustering coefficient - small world phenomenon - short paths (avg 2.6) in spite of low connectivity (0.3%) - structure of networks persistent from day to day - heavily impacted by the terrorist attacks of 9/11, disruption lasted for ~10 days
6600 banks, 70,000 links 66 banks comprise 75% of value25 banks completely connected
“Physics”
Model of the dynamics that take place in payment system under simple rules of settlement
Interaction of simple local rules –> emergent system level behaviour
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
PaymentSystem
When liquidity is high payments are submitted promptly and banks process payments independently of each other
Instructions Payments
Summed over the network, instructions arrive at a steady rate
Liquidity
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
5 5 0 0 5 7 0 0 5 9 0 0 6 1 0 0
Instructions
Pay
men
ts
5 5 0 0
5 6 0 0
5 7 0 0
5 8 0 0
5 9 0 0
6 0 0 0
6 1 0 0
5 5 0 0 5 7 0 0 5 9 0 0 6 1 0 0
Instructions
Pay
men
ts
Influence of liquidity 1
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
5 5 0 0 5 7 0 0 5 9 0 0 6 1 0 0
Instructions
Pay
men
ts
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
Reducing liquidity leads to episodes of congestion when queues build, and cascades of settlement activity when incoming payments allow banks to work off queues. Payment processing becomes coupled across the network
PaymentSystem
Instructions Payments0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
Liquidity
Influence of liquidity 2
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
5 5 0 0 5 7 0 0 5 9 0 0 6 1 0 0
Instructions
Pay
men
ts
PaymentSystem
Instructions Payments0
5000
10000
15000
20000
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Period
Num
ber o
f Ins
truct
ions
At very low liquidity payments are controlled by internal dynamics. Settlement cascades are larger and can pass through the same bank numerous times
Liquidity
Influence of liquidity 3
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
5 5 0 0 5 7 0 0 5 9 0 0 6 1 0 0
Instructions
Pay
men
ts
PaymentSystem
Instructions Payments
A liquidity market substantially reduces congestion using only a small fraction (e.g. 2%) of payment-driven flow
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
0
2 0 0 0
4 0 0 0
6 0 0 0
8 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0
1 2 0 0 0
1 4 0 0 0
1 6 0 0 0
1 8 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 8 0 0 2 0 0 0
Time
Liquidity
Market
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
0 500 1000 1500 2000
Period
Num
ber o
f Ins
truct
ions
Influence of a liquidity market
“Behavior”
Modeling banks as decision makers where each bank’s best action depends on the actions of other banks.
• Banks choose an opening balance at the beginning of each day
• Banks face uncertainty about the opening balances of other banks
• Banks face funding costs and delay costs, which depend on the opening balances (and the random arrival of payment instructions).
• Banks adapt their level of opening balances over time (by means of Fictitious play), depending on observed actions by others
• The game is played until convergence of beliefs takes place
Funding behavior model
0
50
100
150
200
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
funds committed
pa
yoff
0
1
5
10
50
committed by others
(avg)
• Costs are minimized at different liquidity levels, depending on liquidity posted by other banks, e.g. (for n=15, delay cost=5)
– if others post 1, I should post 24
– if others post 5, I should post 15
– if others post 50, I should post 10
funds committed by i
cost
, i
funds committed by <j>
Illustration of costs and best replies
• Banks (naturally) use more liquidity when delay price is high
• The amount used increases rapidly as delay price is increased from 0
• Banks will practically not commit over 49 units
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 1000 2000 3000
delay cost
fun
ds
for n=15 ; 200 payments of unit size per bank
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 2 4 6
delay cost
fun
ds
price of delaysprice of delays
fund
s co
mm
itted
by
i
fund
s co
mm
itted
by
i
Results 1 – base case
• Performance of a payment system is a function of topology, physics and behavior – one factor alone is not enough to evaluate efficiency or robustness
• Graph theory provides good tools for analyzing the structure of interbank payment systems and their liquidity flows and e.g. for identifying important banks
• Statistical mechanics help understand the impact of settlement rules on system performance (simple local rules -> emergent system level behavior)
• Depending on topology, physics and cost parameters, different “liquidity games” emerge, and thus different system level behavior
• The complete model developed in conjunction with the presented work is modular (programmed in Java) and can be easily enriched and used to analyze real policy questions (not only interbank payments)
Conclusions
90
95
100
105
Inde
x
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21September 2001
Nodes Aveage Path LengthConnectivity Reciprocity
Note: 100 = September 10th, 2001.
example: Fedwire around 9/11 2001
Topology and disruption 1