4. Funding Risks

Vulnerabilities from funding risks were roughly in line with historical norms

Funding risks for most banks remained moderate. As a share of assets, uninsured deposits—an important component of most banks' funding risk—were largely unchanged and significantly below elevated levels attained in 2023. Large banks also maintained sound levels of high-quality liquid assets (HQLA). 

Assets in cash-management vehicles continued to grow, primarily driven by government MMFs, which have historically proved the least susceptible to large-scale investor redemptions among cash-management vehicles. Runnable instruments as a share of GDP remained roughly flat at around the middle of its historical distribution, and instruments susceptible to market freezes continued to gradually decline as a share of total runnables. Stablecoin growth moderated in recent months.

Although life insurers' nontraditional liabilities represent only a small share of general account assets, they grew faster than assets. Separately, some types of private credit vehicles faced increased redemption requests triggered by concerns about reduced returns and the quality of some underlying assets. These requests caused most of those private credit vehicles to exercise their right to limit the size of redemptions. Some open-end bond and loan mutual funds remained exposed to liquidity transformation risks that could cause asset fire sales in market downturns, as they allow daily redemptions while holding assets that might become illiquid in times of stress.

Table 4.1 gives the outstanding amounts of runnable money-like liabilities, and figure 4.1 shows the total relative to GDP standing at 86 percent at the end of 2025.

Table 4.1. Size of selected instruments and institutions
Item Outstanding/total assets
(billions of dollars)
Growth,
2024:Q4–2025:Q4
(percent)
Average annual growth,
1997–2025:Q4
(percent)
Total runnable money-like liabilities1 27,033 12.0 5.4
Domestic money market funds2 7,746 13.0 6.7
Government 6,375 13.1 15.2
Prime 1,220 13.1 3.7
Tax exempt 151 11.1 −.4
Uninsured deposits 7,608 7.7 10.6
Repurchase agreements 5,887 19.1 6.1
Commercial paper 1,368 12.2 2.9
Securities lending3 1,201 13.8 7.5
Bond mutual funds 5,032 7.7 8.0

Note: The data extend through 2025:Q4 unless otherwise noted. Outstanding amounts are in nominal terms. Growth rates are nominal and are measured from Q4 of the year immediately preceding the period through Q4 of the final year of the period. Total runnable money-like liabilities exceed the sum of listed components. Unlisted components of runnable money-like liabilities include variable-rate demand obligations, federal funds, funding-agreement-backed securities, private liquidity funds, offshore money market funds, short-term investment funds, local government investment pools, and stablecoins. Bond mutual funds are not part of the total runnable money-like liabilities.

 1. Average annual growth is from 2003:Q1 to 2025:Q4. Return to table

 2. Average annual growth is from 2001:Q1 to 2025:Q4. Return to table

 3. Average annual growth is from 2000:Q1 to 2025:Q3. Securities lending includes only lending collateralized by cash. Return to table

Source: Securities and Exchange Commission, Private Fund Statistics; iMoneyNet, Inc., Offshore Money Fund Analyzer; Bloomberg Finance L.P.; Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: U.S. Municipal Variable-Rate Demand Obligation Update; DTCC Solutions LLC, an affiliate of the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation: commercial paper data; Federal Reserve Board staff calculations based on Risk Management Association, Securities Lending Report; S&P Securities Finance; Investment Company Institute; Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release Z.1, "Financial Accounts of the United States"; Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report) Form FFIEC 031; Morningstar, Inc., Morningstar Direct; Llama Corp, DeFiLlama.

Figure 4.1. Runnable liabilities in short-term funding markets were stable around the middle of their historical range
Figure 4.1. Runnable liabilities in short-term funding markets were stable around the middle of their historical range

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The black striped area denotes the period from 2008:Q4 to 2012:Q4, when insured deposits increased because of the Transaction Account Guarantee program. The "other" category consists of variable-rate demand obligations (VRDOs), federal funds, funding-agreement-backed securities, private liquidity funds, offshore money market funds, short-term investment funds, local government investment pools, and stablecoins. Securities lending includes only lending collateralized by cash. GDP is gross domestic product. Values for VRDOs come from Bloomberg beginning in 2019:Q1. See Jack Bao, Josh David, and Song Han (2015), "The Runnables," FEDS Notes (Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 3), https://www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/notes/feds-notes/2015/the-runnables-20150903.html.

Source: Securities and Exchange Commission, Private Fund Statistics; iMoneyNet, Inc., Offshore Money Fund Analyzer; Bloomberg Finance L.P.; Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association: U.S. Municipal Variable-Rate Demand Obligation Update; DTCC Solutions LLC, an affiliate of the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation: commercial paper data; Federal Reserve Board staff calculations based on Risk Management Association, Securities Lending Report; S&P Securities Finance; Investment Company Institute; Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release Z.1, "Financial Accounts of the United States"; Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report) Form FFIEC 031; gross domestic product, Bureau of Economic Analysis via Haver Analytics; Llama Corp, DeFiLlama.

Most banks maintained high levels of liquidity, and their funding sources were little changed

Aggregate liquidity in the banking system as measured by the ratio of HQLA to short-term debt ticked down for large banks since the previous report but remains at the higher end of the historical distribution for all bank groups (figure 4.2). Many U.S. G-SIBs continued to hold a significant portion of their HQLA in HTM securities, primarily in long-duration agency mortgage-backed securities. Because current market prices for these instruments remained well below their original book values, selling them would require banks to recognize that gap on their balance sheets. Consequently, to generate liquidity from these holdings without impacting regulatory capital, these banks would likely rely on repo market access rather than outright asset sales.11

Figure 4.2. The share of high-quality liquid assets to short-term debt remained at the higher end of the historical distribution
Figure 4.2. The share of high-quality liquid assets to short-term debt remained at the higher end of the historical distribution

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The sample consists of domestic bank holding companies (BHCs), intermediate holding companies (IHCs) with a substantial U.S. commercial banking presence, and commercial banks. G-SIBs are global systemically important banks. Large non–G-SIBs are BHCs and IHCs with greater than $100 billion in total assets that are not G-SIBs. Short-term debt is total liabilities less long-term debt. The figure shows banks with total assets greater than or equal to $10 billion. The shaded bars with top caps indicate periods of business recession as defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research: March 2001–November 2001, December 2007–June 2009, and February 2020–April 2020.

Source: Federal Reserve Board, Form FR Y-9C, Consolidated Financial Statements for Holding Companies; Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report) Form FFIEC 031.

More generally, banks' funding structures were little changed in the aggregate over the second half of 2025 (figure 4.3). Uninsured deposits as a percentage of total assets were in line with levels seen through the mid-2010s and significantly lower than their peak level in 2022. Since 2023, large banks increased their reliance on short-term wholesale funding sources with maturities of less than one year. The current level is around the highest over the past decade but well below pre-2009 peaks. Over the same period, regional banks generally relied more on reciprocal and, to a lesser degree, brokered deposits. While all reciprocal deposits and a majority of brokered deposits are fully insured, they are more expensive than traditional core insured deposits and may not be as stable during times of stress.

Figure 4.3. Bank funding structures stabilized at levels consistent with historical norms
Figure 4.3. Bank funding structures stabilized at levels consistent with historical norms

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Short-term wholesale funding is defined as the sum of large time deposits with maturity less than 1 year, federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase, deposits in foreign offices with maturity less than 1 year, trading liabilities (excluding revaluation losses on derivatives), and other borrowed money with maturity less than 1 year. The shaded bars with top caps indicate periods of business recession as defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research: December 2007–June 2009 and February 2020–April 2020.

Source: Federal Reserve Board, Form FR Y-9C, Consolidated Financial Statements for Holding Companies; Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report) Form FFIEC 031.

Assets in cash-management vehicles continued to grow, primarily driven by inflows into government money market funds

As of January 2026, total MMF assets had risen to $7.9 trillion from $7.2 trillion a year earlier, likely because MMF yields remained consistently more attractive than those of most bank deposits (figure 4.4). The main contributor to this growth was inflows into government funds, which are less susceptible to runs because they only hold U.S. government and agency securities as well as repos backed by them. Assets under management in institutional prime MMFs—historically, the most vulnerable segment—account for 3 percent of MMFs' assets.

Figure 4.4. Money market fund assets maintained their upward trend through the beginning of 2026
Figure 4.4. Money market fund assets maintained their upward trend through the beginning of 2026

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data are converted to constant 2026 dollars using the consumer price index.

Source: Federal Reserve Board staff calculations based on Investment Company Institute data; consumer price index, Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics.

Other cash-management vehicles, including dollar-denominated offshore MMFs and short-term investment funds, also invest in money market instruments and engage in liquidity transformation. Estimated aggregate assets under management remained around $2.2 trillion as of the end of 2025. Many of these vehicles have portfolios similar to prime MMFs. Although the exact size of those most similar to prime MMFs is difficult to gauge owing to data gaps, estimates range from $1 trillion to $2 trillion.

Stablecoin growth moderated

Stablecoin assets—digital assets designed to maintain a stable value relative to a national currency or another reference asset—have grown 16 percent from July 2025 to the end of last year.12 However, this rapid growth has moderated in recent months amid a broader decline in the price of crypto-assets—a pattern consistent with the fact that stablecoins are mostly used to facilitate crypto-trading activities—and the level is currently $320 billion, concentrated among the two largest issuers (figure 4.5).

Figure 4.5. Total stablecoin market capitalization remained at record highs
Figure 4.5. Total stablecoin market capitalization remained at record highs

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The key identifies series in order from top to bottom. USD is U.S. dollar.

Source: Llama Corp, DeFiLlama.

The GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act) was signed into law in July 2025. This legislation established a federal regulatory framework for the issuance and transaction of "payment stablecoins." Currently, regulatory agencies are drafting rules to implement the act's core provisions. Key among these are new requirements regarding reserve transparency and redemption rights, which are designed to mitigate run risks and foster sustainable growth within this asset class.

Bond and loan mutual funds navigated recent volatility without incident

As of the fourth quarter of 2025, mutual funds held approximately $1.6 trillion in U.S. corporate bonds—accounting for around 14 percent of U.S. corporate bonds outstanding (figure 4.6). Assets under management in mutual funds with holdings that are concentrated in bank loans and high-yield bonds—which are riskier and less liquid forms of debt—were around $362 billion in February 2026, about 20 percent below the high levels in 2021 (figure 4.7). Despite heightened volatility, inflows largely offset outflows for high-yield corporate bond and bank loan mutual funds in the beginning of 2026, leaving net flows roughly neutral (figure 4.8).

Figure 4.6. Mutual fund corporate bond holdings returned to pre-pandemic levels
Figure 4.6. Mutual fund corporate bond holdings returned to pre-pandemic levels

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data show holdings of all U.S. corporate bonds by all U.S.-domiciled mutual funds (holdings of foreign bonds are excluded). The data are converted to constant 2025 dollars using the consumer price index.

Source: Federal Reserve Board staff estimates based on Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release Z.1, "Financial Accounts of the United States"; consumer price index, Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics.

Figure 4.7. Bank loan and high-yield fund assets stayed well below their 2021 peaks
Figure 4.7. Bank loan and high-yield fund assets stayed well below their 2021 peaks

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data are converted to constant 2026 dollars using the consumer price index. The key identifies series in order from top to bottom.

Source: Investment Company Institute; consumer price index, Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics.

Figure 4.8. Inflows to mutual funds continued in early 2026
Figure 4.8. Inflows to mutual funds continued in early 2026

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Mutual fund assets under management as of February 2026 included $2,637 billion in investment-grade bond mutual funds, $286 billion in high-yield bond mutual funds, and $75 billion in bank loan mutual funds. Bank loan mutual funds, also known as floating-rate bond funds, are excluded from high-yield bond mutual funds.

Source: Investment Company Institute.

Central counterparties increased margin requirements amid heightened volatility, but margin calls were met with no difficulties

The start of the conflict between the U.S. and Iran introduced a wave of volatility into energy markets, affecting the markets for crude oil and European natural gas most acutely. In response, central counterparties (CCPs) increased margin requirements significantly for products within the affected markets. There was no evidence that market participants faced difficulty in meeting those demands. CCPs had been actively working to improve their risk-management practices and liquidity positions well before this latest market disruption by increasing prefunded mutualized resources from already high levels. Elevated initial margins and ample overall prefunded resources lower the risk faced by CCPs of the potential default by a clearing member or market participant.

Life insurers' nontraditional liabilities increased further while remaining a small share of assets

Life insurers continued to increase their reliance on nontraditional liabilities, including funding-agreement-backed securities, Federal Home Loan Bank advances, and cash received through securities lending and repo transactions (figure 4.9). Total nontraditional liabilities summed to $531 billion in the fourth quarter of 2025, growing 15 percent in real terms from a year ago, although they remain small relative to insurers' asset portfolios. Measures of the share of illiquid assets to total assets for life insurers and for property and casualty insurers were around 37 percent and 14 percent, respectively, in 2024 (figure 4.10).

Figure 4.9. Life insurers' use of nontraditional liabilities increased further
Figure 4.9. Life insurers' use of nontraditional liabilities increased further

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data are converted to constant 2025 dollars using the consumer price index. FHLB is Federal Home Loan Bank. The data are annual from 2006 to 2010 and quarterly thereafter. The key identifies bars in order from top to bottom.

Source: Consumer price index, Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics; Moody's Analytics, Inc., CreditView, Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Program Index; Securities and Exchange Commission, Forms 10-Q and 10-K; National Association of Insurance Commissioners, quarterly and annual statutory filings accessed via S&P Global, Capital IQ Pro; Bloomberg Finance L.P.

Figure 4.10. Life insurers continued to hold a significant share of illiquid assets on their balance sheets
Figure 4.10. Life insurers continued to hold a significant share of illiquid assets on their balance sheets

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data are converted to constant 2024 dollars using the consumer price index. Securitized products include collateralized loan obligations for corporate debt, private-label commercial mortgage-backed securities for commercial real estate (CRE), and private-label residential mortgage-backed securities and asset-backed securities (ABS) backed by autos, credit cards, consumer loans, and student loans for other ABS. Illiquid corporate debt includes private placements, bank and syndicated loans, and high-yield bonds. Alternative investments include assets filed under Schedule BA. P&C is property and casualty. The key identifies bars in order from top to bottom.

Source: Consumer price index, Bureau of Labor Statistics via Haver Analytics; Federal Reserve Board staff estimates based on data from Bloomberg Finance L.P. and National Association of Insurance Commissioners, annual statutory filings.

Some private credit vehicles faced increases in redemption requests

In recent years, firms active in private credit markets have been raising more capital from individual investors through two types of "semi-liquid" vehicles: perpetual-life BDCs and interval funds. These semi-liquid vehicles offer investors an option to redeem capital subject to restrictions, such as discretionary redemption caps. As sentiment in private credit markets deteriorated over the past year—reflecting changes in interest rates, some defaults, and other concerns about asset quality—semi-liquid private credit vehicles have faced notable increases in redemption requests, and in most cases their managers chose to cap redemptions. Although outflows from these funds have moderately exceeded new inflows in the first quarter of 2026, redemption requests have remained manageable. See the box "Developments in Private Credit" for more information.

Based on data through the fourth quarter of 2025, banks continued lending to private credit funds and BDCs, with aggregate loan commitments and outstanding amounts increasing relative to the previous quarter. There were some reductions in loan commitments to certain private credit vehicles during this period, while commitments to other private credit vehicles increased. These adjustments were consistent with historical patterns and seemed to reflect normal risk-management practices at banks.

Box 4.1. Developments in Private Credit

Private credit, defined as loans originated by nonbanks that are negotiated on a bilateral basis between borrowers and lenders, experienced rapid growth over the past decade and is an important source of financing for below-investment-grade businesses. As of the latest data in the second half of 2025, private credit loans accounted for about $1.4 trillion, or 10 percent, of the total debt of U.S. nonfinancial corporations, or about one-third of total below-investment-grade debt, excluding bank loans (figure A).

Figure A. Private credit market size and share of corporate debt
Figure A. Private credit market size and share of corporate debt

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Based on invested capital of North America–focused private debt funds and total assets of business development companies and credit-focused interval funds.

Source: Preqin; LSEG Data & Analytics: BDC Collateral; ICE Data Indices, LLC, used with permission; PitchBook Data, Leveraged Commentary & Data; Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release Z.1, "Financial Accounts of the United States."

Private credit lending has historically relied on raising money from institutional investors via private debt funds that are locked up from 7 to 10 years and do not offer investors an option to redeem their capital. However, in recent years, more private capital has been raised from individual investors through two types of "semi-liquid" vehicles:

  • Perpetual-life BDCs ($306 billion in gross assets, $161 billion in net assets) raise capital continuously and offer investors the ability to redeem their shares quarterly. Most of these BDCs disclosed an intention to cap total investor redemptions at 5 percent of their NAV per quarter, although managers can exercise discretion regarding whether to accept more or fewer redemptions. These funds typically operate with less leverage than do BDCs that trade on an exchange and which do not offer redemptions.
  • Interval funds ($119 billion in gross assets, $80 billion in net assets) are specialized closed-end funds that raise capital continuously from individual investors. They offer redemption features at certain intervals, typically quarterly, and, unlike perpetual BDCs, are required to accept at least 5 percent of the redemption requests. Interval funds tend to operate with much lower levels of leverage than perpetual BDCs.

Taken together, semi-liquid funds account for $425 billion in gross assets and $241 billion in net assets, or about 20 percent of net assets under management in private credit vehicles (figure B).

Figure B. Semi-liquid private credit funds
Figure B. Semi-liquid private credit funds

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Based on net assets of perpetual business development companies and credit-focused interval funds.

Source: LSEG Data & Analytics: BDC Collateral; Morningstar, Inc., Morningstar Direct; Preqin.

Since the middle of last year, investor sentiment turned increasingly negative following some high-profile corporate defaults and concerns about the potential for advances in AI to disrupt industries, particularly software. The software sector had become the largest sector in private credit portfolios, driven by elevated private equity activity.

Redemption requests increased from relatively low levels during the fourth quarter of 2025 and accelerated further in the first quarter of 2026, when a number of funds received requests that were much larger than 5 percent of NAV (figure C). Most managers chose to cap redemptions at 5 percent of NAV.

Figure C. Perpetual business development company net flows
Figure C. Perpetual business development company net flows

Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Based on 14 largest perpetual business development companies, which account for 86 percent of the segment's total assets. The data begin in 2021:Q2.

Source: Federal Reserve staff calculations based on Securities and Exchange Commission, Form 8-K.

Concurrently, inflows to perpetual BDCs weakened in the fourth quarter and slowed further in the first quarter. Accepted redemption requests somewhat exceeded new inflows in the first quarter of 2026, the first time this has occurred since these vehicles were created (figure C).

Semi-liquid funds maintain a number of liquidity sources in order to manage potential investor redemptions. These include investor inflows, regular principal repayments of existing loans, revolving lines of credit from banks, and holdings of more liquid assets such as leveraged loans. For the largest 10 perpetual BDCs, which account for 80 percent of the sector's assets, available bank credit and cash can cover at least three calendar quarters of net redemptions up to the 5 percent level of NAV. Moreover, perpetual BDCs have the ability to not accept any redemptions if they deem that would be in the best interest of the fund.

As such, risks to financial stability from further redemption requests appear limited and manageable. However, continued redemptions and negative sentiment could lead to a reduction in credit availability for some borrowers, especially those with relatively higher credit risk, who could find other sources of credit costly or difficult to access.

 

References

 

 11. Securities held in HTM accounts are accounted at fair value for liquidity coverage ratio purposes but at book value for regulatory capital purposes. Selling HTM securities (rather than holding them to maturity) could "taint" the entire HTM investment portfolio, requiring it to be marked to market. This could result in the selling bank recognizing a significant mark-to-market loss and reduction in regulatory capital. Banks with access to repo markets can raise cash by pledging securities in a repo transaction without tainting their HTM portfolio. Return to text

 12. Stablecoins are typically backed by a pool of "reserve" assets that include Treasury bills and other short-term instruments, but some stablecoins also include loans and other digital assets as part of their reserve. Return to text

Back to Top
Last Update: May 28, 2026