FinObservatory

Research note: replication

Lagged credit growth still predicts banking crises, and 12 added years sharpen it

Schularick and Taylor’s crisis logit, run as published on the successor vintage of their own dataset, reproduces its qualitative result. On 2,137 country-years across 18 economies (18762020), carrying 72 systemic-crisis onsets, the second lag of real loan growth enters with a coefficient of 6.74 (clustered SE 1.72, p = 8.9e-5), and the credit model’s in-sample AUC of 0.708 beats the money model’s 0.670 on the same design. Cutting the sample at 2008, the paper’s own terminal year, gives a credit AUC of 0.693: the 20092020 extension strengthens the result rather than eroding it.

6.74
lag-2 coefficient on real loan growth (clustered SE 1.72)
0.708 / 0.670
in-sample AUC, credit vs money, full sample
72 / 2,137
crisis onsets in the credit sample (base rate 3.37%)
46.7
joint Wald chi2(5) on the credit lags, clustered covariance
18
economies, 1876–2020 realized (the paper: 14, 1870–2008)

The spec, as published

The dependent variable is crisisJST, the database’s revised coding of systemic banking-crisis start years. The regressors are lags 1 through 5 of the log change in real bank loans, nominal tloans deflated by cpi, plus country fixed effects, fit by logit. The money variant replaces loans with broad money (money), deflated the same way. Standard errors are cluster-robust by country. The war years 1914–1918 and 1939–1945 are dropped. The lag order, the deflation, the fixed effects, the clustering and the war exclusion are all the paper’s choices, held fixed here. One pre-declared robustness variant is run and no other: both models re-fit on the sample ending 2008, the paper’s terminal year.

Missing observations enter no regression. The panel has 2,718 country-years; requiring 5 consecutive lags of real loan growth, a coded crisis flag and non-war years leaves 2,137 for the credit model and 2,204 for the money model. The two models are therefore not fit on identical samples, and their onset counts differ: 72 against 76.

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Release 6, retrieved 2026-07-09. Statistics on the site are subject to revision; the consultation date is part of the citation. Data citation: Jorda, Schularick and Taylor (2017), "Macrofinancial History and the New Business Cycle Facts," NBER Macroeconomics Annual 31.

The horse race

On the full sample the credit model’s pseudo R-squared is 0.076 against the money model’s 0.043, its AUC 0.708 against 0.670, and its clustered joint chi-square 46.7 against 20.9. The paper-era sample orders the same three pairs the same way: 0.069 against 0.041, 0.693 against 0.666, 41.5 against 17.1. That ordering is the paper’s headline horse race.

ModelYearsnOnsetsBase rateJoint chi2, clusteredpJoint chi2, nonrobustpPseudo R2AUC
Credit, full sample187620202,137723.37%46.726.5e-933.433.1e-60.0760.708
Money, full sample187620202,204763.45%20.908.5e-411.990.0350.0430.670
Credit, paper era187620081,923723.74%41.527.4e-828.612.8e-50.0690.693
Money, paper era187620081,988763.82%17.140.00410.160.0710.0410.666

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Joint tests are Wald tests that all 5 lag coefficients are zero, computed twice: on the cluster-robust covariance (the same one behind every SE on this page) and on the nonrobust ML covariance. Pseudo R2 is McFadden's. AUC is in-sample.

The lag structure: one lag carries the model

In the full-sample credit model, lag 2 enters at 6.74 with p = 8.9e-5; the smallest p-value among the other four credit lags is 0.15. The five credit-lag coefficients sum to 7.70 (6.83 in the paper-era sample, where lag 2 is 6.34 with p = 1.0e-4). That shape, a dominant second lag inside a positive five-lag sum, is the temporal pattern behind the paper’s title: the boom precedes the bust by years, not by months.

-4-2024681012lag 1lag 2lag 3lag 4lag 5logit coefficient (whiskers: +/- 1.96 cluster-robust standard errors)Real loan growth (credit model), lag 1: coefficient 0.31, clustered SE 1.32Real loan growth (credit model), lag 2: coefficient 6.74, clustered SE 1.72Real loan growth (credit model), lag 3: coefficient -0.63, clustered SE 0.74Real loan growth (credit model), lag 4: coefficient 0.15, clustered SE 1.14Real loan growth (credit model), lag 5: coefficient 1.13, clustered SE 0.78Real money growth (money model), lag 1: coefficient 1.92, clustered SE 2.69Real money growth (money model), lag 2: coefficient 4.56, clustered SE 2.39Real money growth (money model), lag 3: coefficient -0.52, clustered SE 1.28Real money growth (money model), lag 4: coefficient 2.09, clustered SE 1.53Real money growth (money model), lag 5: coefficient 1.41, clustered SE 1.55Real loan growth (credit model)Real money growth (money model)

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Full sample. Whiskers span +/- 1.96 cluster-robust standard errors (18 country clusters).

LagCredit coefClustered SEpMoney coefClustered SEp
10.311.320.8181.922.690.477
26.741.728.9e-54.562.390.057
3-0.630.740.397-0.521.280.684
40.151.140.8962.091.530.171
51.130.780.1461.411.550.364

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Full sample, both models. p-values from the cluster-robust covariance.

Discrimination, and what a 0.708 AUC means at a 3.37% base rate

The ROC curves below are in-sample: the model is scored on the same observations it was fit on, so they overstate what a real-time forecaster would have had. The base rate makes the trade-off concrete. The credit curve passes through an operating point that catches 75% of the 72 onsets while flagging 49.4% of the 2,065 non-crisis country-years (the three-quarters target behind that reading is our illustrative choice, not the paper’s). The claim that survives is comparative: the credit model’s AUC of 0.708 exceeds the money model’s 0.670.

000.250.250.50.50.750.7511Credit model: in-sample AUC 0.708Money model: in-sample AUC 0.670Credit model: AUC 0.708Money model: AUC 0.670false positive ratetrue positive rate

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Full sample. The dashed diagonal is a coin flip. Each curve is traced over the thresholds of its model's fitted probabilities, thinned to a fixed grid for rendering.

The joint test depends on the covariance, and both are printed

With 18 country clusters, cluster-robust inference rests on asymptotics in the number of clusters, and 18 is few. The Wald test that all 5 credit lags are zero gives chi2 = 46.72 (p = 6.5e-9) on the clustered covariance and 33.43 (p = 3.1e-6) on the nonrobust one: significant either way. The money model is not so lucky. Its full-sample joint p is 8.5e-4 clustered but 0.035 nonrobust, and in the paper-era sample the nonrobust p rises to 0.071, above the 5 percent bar. Whether money is a marginal predictor or a clearly significant one depends on which covariance you trust with 18 clusters; whether credit predicts crises does not.

The sample is not the paper’s

The paper used 14 advanced economies, 1870–2008, and its own 2012 crisis chronology. This vintage carries 18 economies to 2020: the 4 additions relative to the paper’s list are Belgium, Finland, Ireland, Portugal, and they are not passengers, contributing 12 of the 72 onsets in the full-sample credit model. Realized spans differ by country: the credit model’s earliest usable year is 1876, and entry years and onset counts are in the table.

EconomyISO3Years in credit modelnOnsetsIn the paper’s 14?
AustraliaAUS187620201262yes
BelgiumBEL189120201013no
CanadaCAN187620201331yes
SwitzerlandCHE187620201334yes
GermanyDEU187620201194yes
DenmarkDNK187620201336yes
SpainESP19062020956yes
FinlandFIN187620201335no
FranceFRA19062020972yes
UKGBR188620201234yes
IrelandIRL19382020761no
ItalyITA187620201338yes
JapanJPN188020181276yes
NetherlandsNLD190620201032yes
NorwayNOR187620201334yes
PortugalPRT187620201173no
SwedenSWE187720201326yes
USAUSA188620201235yes

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Composition of the full-sample credit model after lag construction, crisis-flag coverage and the war exclusion. Gaps inside a span (the war years at minimum) mean n is less than the span length.

The dependent variable moved between vintages

The file carries two crisis codings: crisisJST, the revised chronology used in every regression above, and crisisJST_old, the database’s earlier coding. On the 2,568 country-years where both are coded (the earlier coding is null for Ireland in every year before 2020, and nowhere else), the revised chronology has 87 onsets against 90: 3 country-years gained onset status (Belgium 1876, Japan 1901, USA 1930) and 6 lost it (Netherlands 1893, Germany 1907, Netherlands 1907, USA 1929, Denmark 1931, Netherlands 1939). Whether the earlier column matches the 2012 paper’s published dates row for row cannot be checked from this file, so no such claim is made; what the comparison shows is that the dependent variable itself moves between vintages, including the United States’ Depression-era entry shifting from 1929 to 1930.

Source: Jorda-Schularick-Taylor Macrohistory Database Release 6, retrieved 2026-07-09. Statistics on the site are subject to revision; the consultation date is part of the citation.

What this cannot tell you

  • This is not the paper’s dataset. Different country set (18 against 14), different years (18702020 against 1870–2008), and a revised crisis chronology. Whether the underlying loan and money series were also revised between vintages cannot be checked here, where only Release 6 exists. No coefficient on this page should be expected to match the paper’s to the second decimal, and none is presented as doing so.
  • AUC is in-sample. The model is scored on the observations it was fit on. Nothing on this page is an out-of-sample or real-time forecasting claim.
  • 18 clusters is few. Cluster-robust SEs and Wald tests rely on many-cluster asymptotics. Both covariances are printed for every joint test because they disagree about the money model.
  • The regressors overlap. Adjacent observations share 4 of their 5 lag years, so regressor windows are serially dependent by construction. That is the paper’s design, kept here, and it is part of why clustering matters.
  • Attrition is silent and unequal. Of 2,718 panel rows, 2,137 survive to the credit model and 2,204 to the money model. Countries with late loan coverage enter late, and the two horses do not run on identical tracks.
  • The war exclusion is inherited, not tested. Dropping 1914–1918 and 1939–1945 is the paper’s specification choice. No variant with the wars included was run, because the discipline here is the paper’s spec plus exactly one pre-declared variant, the 2008 cutoff.

The original result

Schularick, M., and A. M. Taylor (2012), “Credit Booms Gone Bust: Monetary Policy, Leverage Cycles, and Financial Crises, 1870–2008,” American Economic Review102(2), 1029–1061, on 14 advanced economies, 1870–2008, with their own crisis chronology: lagged growth of real bank loans is a significant predictor of systemic banking crises in a fixed-effects logit, and credit-based models outperform models built on broad money, their summary being that financial crises are “credit booms gone bust.” No figure from the paper is re-printed here beyond its stated sample, because this page cannot verify the paper’s table values against their exact dataset.

Our sample: the same project’s Macrohistory Database, Release 6 (retrieved 2026-07-09), 18 economies, realized estimation years 18762020, revised crisisJST chronology, spec as published plus one pre-declared cutoff variant at 2008. The qualitative claim reproduces on every object tested: the second credit lag is large and significant, the five-lag block is jointly significant under both covariances, the credit model’s fit and discrimination exceed the money model’s in both samples, and extending the data past the paper’s horizon raises the credit AUC from 0.693 to 0.708.