안정적인 은행, 강력한 자본시장 - 미래의 유럽 금융 시스템

Four decades is a long time – especially in the world of finance. And, in these four decades, we have seen fundamental change not only in the world of finance, but also in Europe. During this time, our continent has made enormous progress towards integration: the fall of Iron Curtain, the creation of the European single market, and the introduction of the euro. Many economic borders in Europe have since disappeared – but, with regard to integrating Europe’s financial markets, there is still room for improvement.

It is particularly important to make progress here, because Europe now needs to finance substantial investment into AI, the energy supply, and decarbonisation. The Draghi Report put these additional investment needs at between 750 and 800 billion euro per year up until 2030.1 Such expenditure cannot be met using public funds alone. This is because, on top of this, expenditure is needed to strengthen defence capabilities. And, in order to mobilise sufficient private funds for this purpose, the performance of the European financial system needs to improve significantly.

In my speech today, I would therefore like to talk about the current situation and the outlook for the Savings and Investments Union. However, I will bookend this part with a brief overview of the status quo of the European financial system at the start and then the state of play with regard to simplifying banking regulation at the end.

Where does the European financial system stand today, and how is it doing? At present, Europe’s banks are pleasingly robust. This was particularly evident during the banking turmoil in the spring of 2023. Although tensions spread to European bank shares and bank bonds, these remained limited and short-lived in the euro area. Strong capital and liquidity buffers amongst European banks played an important role here.2 They have maintained this solid starting position: the European banking sector remains strong in terms of capital and liquidity in 2026, too.3 The experiences of 2023 show us that resilience is a valuable asset – and it should not be jeopardised by future reforms to banking regulation, either. At the same time, we should not consider ourselves satisfied with the stability of European banks: we must also ask ourselves how competitive they are by international standards.

In this regard, it is important to first put things into context: European and non-European banks are much more rarely in direct competition than might be assumed. Analyses by our banking supervisors show, for example, that German and US banks only rarely compete with each other directly in local credit markets. It is a different situation for investment banking and trading. In this sector, globally active big banks meet directly in international competition. Measured in terms of banks’ overall capital requirements, however, these activities play a significantly smaller role than traditional lending business. For corporate loans, for example, German banks are therefore primarily in competition with other German and European institutions – and less so with large US banks. Nevertheless, it is worth taking a look across the Atlantic. This is because a comparison can show where Europe’s banks stand by international standards – and where potential structural disadvantages lie.

US banks – and, in some cases, British banks – are ahead of European institutions in key performance indicators, such as net interest margins and price-to-book ratios.4 At this point, some people may be tempted to explain the lower profitability by an overcapitalisation of European banks. However, studies conducted by the ECB and the Bundesbank tell a different story: according to these, higher capital ratios reduce interest expenditure and fluctuations in earnings.5 This allows banks to lower their risk premia for refinancing, which increases their profitability.

The structural weakness instead lies elsewhere: US banks benefit from deep and liquid capital markets as well as a highly integrated financial system, while Europe’s banking and capital markets remain fragmented. This makes it more difficult to allocate capital efficiently and to exploit economies of scale. In addition, there are different, complex and, in some cases, contradictory regulatory requirements in various European countries, which exacerbate these structural inefficiencies even further.6 On balance, this paints a mixed picture: Europe’s banking sector is resilient – but structural inefficiencies are holding back its performance.

The challenge is therefore not a matter of quickly freeing up money and reducing the resilience of our banks through deregulation, but of improving the performance of our financial system on a lasting basis. This is precisely where the Savings and Investments Union comes in. Its aim is to better connect savings with productive investment, and thus more closely integrate both the capital markets and the European banking market. This is intended to strengthen