The global financial centres index (GFCI) 3 - Z/Yen

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Global Financial Centres Index the sensitivity to instrumental factors to move towards the group of ‘leaders’. Tokyo is classified as evolving and is a centre that used to count itself as a leader, but it is still recovering from difficulties it experienced during the 1990s. Another measure of how volatile a financial centre’s ranking might be is the ‘spread’ or variance of the individual assessments given to each centre (that is, the degree to which some respondents assessed them highly and other respondents assessed them poorly). In Chart 3, the sensitivity to instrumental factors (from Chart 2) and the variance of assessments are contrasted: Chart 3 The Top 50 Financial Centres Variance of Assessments versus Sensitivity to Instrumental Factors Increasing Sensitivity to Instrumental Factors > •Osaka Brussels• •Bahamas •Vienna Shanghai• Chicago• •Qatar Mumbai• Bahrain• •Stockholm •Dubai •Rome Johannesburg• •Tokyo •Beijing •Melbourne •Vancouver •Montreal •Hamilton Unpredictable Munich• •Luxembourg •Copenhagen Dublin• Gibraltar• •Milan •Monaco British Virgin Islands• •Helsinki •Paris Glasgow• •Boston Madrid• •Zurich Toronto• •San • Francisco •Hong Kong Edinburgh• Cayman Islands •Isle of Man •Guernsey •Geneva •Amsterdam •Washington D.C. Singapore• •Jersey New York• •Frankfurt •London Stable •Sydney Increasing Variance of Assessments > Chart 3 shows three ‘bands’ of financial centres. The ‘Unpredictable’ centres in the top right of the chart, such as Vienna, Vancouver and Munich, have a high sensitivity to changes in the instrumental factors and a high variance of assessments. These centres have the highest potential volatility in GFCI ratings. 20
The Global Financial Centres Index The ‘Stable’ centres in the bottom left of the chart (including London, New York, Singapore, Frankfurt, Paris, Hong Kong, and Zurich) have a low sensitivity to changes in the instrumental factors and a lower variance of assessments. These centres are likely to exhibit the lowest volatility in future GFCI ratings. ‘Dynamic’ centres in the centre have the potential to move in either direction. In GFCI 2, the financial centres in the extremes of the ‘Unpredictable’ category (those with the most potential to improve or decline) showed varying degrees of movement in GFCI 3: Oslo (-5 points), Melbourne (-15), Vancouver (+23) and Munich (+11). The first three of these centres also showed relatively large movements in GFCI 2 (Munich was new in GFCI 2). Vancouver and Munich remain in the ‘Unpredictable’ category in GFCI 3, and are joined by Vienna and the Bahamas. As with GFCI 2, GFCI 3 can provide ‘industry sector indices’ including: banking, asset management, insurance, professional services and regulatory/ government bodies. These indices were created by building the GFCI statistical models using only the questionnaire responses of respondents from the relevant industry sectors. As might be expected of the two global financial centres, London and New York retain 1st and 2nd places in all sector-specific indices. The industry sectors are listed here in decreasing order of the number of questionnaire respondents from each sector: 21
Page 1 and 2: March 2008 en THE GLOBAL FINANCIAL
Page 3 and 4: The Global Financial Centres Index
Page 23: The Global Financial Centres Index
Page 75 and 76:
The Global Financial Centres Index
Page 77 and 78:
The Global Financial Centres Index
Page 79:
The City of London Corporation The
show all

The global financial centres index (GFCI) 3 - Z/Yen

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?