  Modern financial networks exhibit a high degree of interconnectedness and
determining the causes of instability and contagion in financial networks is
necessary to inform policy and avoid future financial collapse. In the American
Economic Review, Elliott, Golub and Jackson proposed a simple model for
capturing the dynamics of complex financial networks. In Elliott, Golub and
Jackson's model, each institution in the network can buy underlying assets or
percentage shares in other institutions (cross-holdings) and if any
institution's value drops below a critical threshold value, its value suffers
an additional failure cost.
  This work shows that even in simple model put forward by Elliott, Golub and
Jackson there are fundamental barriers to understanding the risks that are
inherent in a network. First, if institutions are not required to maintain a
minimum amount of self-holdings, an $\epsilon$ change in investments by a
single institution can have an arbitrarily magnified influence on the net worth
of the institutions in the system. This sensitivity result shows that if
institutions have small self-holdings, then estimating the market value of an
institution requires almost perfect information about every cross-holding in
the system. Second, we show that even if a regulator has complete information
about all cross-holdings in the system, it may be computationally intractable
to even estimate the number of failures that could be caused by an arbitrarily
small shock to the system. Together, these results show that any uncertainty in
the cross-holdings or values of the underlying assets can be amplified by the
network to arbitrarily large uncertainty in the valuations of institutions in
the network.
