Riding the wave of credit: Are longer expansions really a bad omen?

Abstract

Some studies argue that credit booms that end up in banking crises are usually longer than those that end without creating havoc. However, they do not test this hypothesis empirically. This paper employs a duration model to assess the relationship between the length of credit booms and their outcome. The empirical analysis shows that credit expansions that end in banking crisis are indeed more prone to last longer than those that end softly. Furthermore, differences in length patterns are found to start in the build-up phase, extending to the unwinding phase of credit cycles.