The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Do Mergers Improve Information? Evidence from the Loan Market
Open accessAbstract
We examine the informational effects of M&As by investigating whether bank mergers improve banks' ability to screen borrowers. By exploiting a data set in which we observe a measure of a borrower's default risk that the lenders observe only imperfectly, we find evidence of these informational improvements. Mergers lead to a closer correspondence between interest rates and individual default risk: after a merger, risky borrowers experience an increase in the interest rate, while nonrisky borrowers enjoy lower interest rates. These informational benefits appear to derive from improvements in information processing resulting from the merger, rather than from explicit information sharing on individual customers among the merging parties. Our evidence suggests that part of these informational improvements stem from the consolidated banks using “hard” information more intensively.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information
Stiglitz, J. E., & Weiss, A. (1981) · Columbia University · doi:10.7916/d8v12ft1 · Cited by 12,769
How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?
Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355304772839588 · Cited by 10,641
Financial intermediation and delegated monitoring
Diamond, D. W. (1984) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2297430 · Cited by 8,476
Berger, A. N., Miller, N. H., Petersen, M. A., Rajan, R. G., & Stein, J. C. (2005) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.06.003 · Cited by 1,888
Some evidence on the uniqueness of bank loans
James, C. (1987) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/0304-405x(87)90003-1 · Cited by 1,610
Does Fund Size Erode Mutual Fund Performance? The Role of Liquidity and Organization
Chen, J., Hong, H., Huang, M., & Kubik, J. D. (2004) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828043052277 · Cited by 1,430
Hubs and High Fares: Dominance and Market Power in the U.S. Airline Industry
Borenstein, S. (1989) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2555575 · Cited by 809
Cited by
Zombie Lending and Depressed Restructuring in Japan
Caballero, R. J., Hoshi, T., & Kashyap, A. K. (2008) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.98.5.1943 · Cited by 1,543
Does Fund Size Erode Mutual Fund Performance? The Role of Liquidity and Organization
Chen, J., Hong, H., Huang, M., & Kubik, J. D. (2004) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/0002828043052277 · Cited by 1,430
PORTFOLIO SELECTION WITH MONOTONE MEAN‐VARIANCE PREFERENCES
Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., Rustichini, A., & Taboga, M. (2009) · Mathematical Finance · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9965.2009.00376.x · Cited by 426
Disentangling demand and supply in credit developments: A survey-based analysis for Italy
Del Giovane, P., Eramo, G., & Nobili, A. (2011) · Journal of Banking & Finance · doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2011.03.001 · Cited by 417
The financing of small innovative firms: the Italian case
Magri, S. (2009) · Economics of Innovation and New Technology · doi:10.1080/10438590701738016 · Cited by 409
Metadata
- Authors
- PANETTA, F., SCHIVARDI, F., & SHUM, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Money, Credit and Banking
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-05-13
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 673-709
- ISSN
- 0022-2879 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-4616
- OpenAlex
- W3124131822
- Cited by
- 440
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 121.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do Mergers Improve Information? Evidence from the Loan Market. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1538-4616.2009.00227.x
- The paper
- PANETTA, F., SCHIVARDI, F., & SHUM, M. (2009). Do Mergers Improve Information? Evidence from the Loan Market. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4616.2009.00227.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
