







This article investigates the credit card debt puzzle. Simultaneously holding credit card debt and liquid assets is puzzling given the sizeable difference between interest rates of debt and assets. However, this behavior is common—about 31% of households in the 2016 Survey of Consumer Finances. The cost of co-holding may be justified if consumers anticipate future restrictions in credit or if they need to maintain liquidity. Other existing explanations for co-holding include impulsive spending and low financial literacy. This research reveals a new explanation for the credit card debt puzzle: consumers’ overconfidence of their financial knowledge. Using a Coarsened Exact Matching method, we found that overconfident consumers were 20%–40% more likely to co-hold credit card debt and liquid assets.
Debt literacy, financial experiences, and overindebtedness
We analyze a national sample of Americans with respect to their debt literacy, financial experiences, and their judgments about the extent of their indebtedness. Debt literacy is a component of broader financial understanding that measures knowledge about debt and self-assessed financial knowledge. Financial experiences are the participants’ reported experiences with traditional borrowing, alternative borrowing, and investing. Overindebtedness is a self-reported measure. Debt literacy is low, with only about one-third of the population grasping the basics of interest compounding. Even after controlling for demographics, we find a relationship between debt literacy and both financial experiences and debt loads. Individuals with lower levels of debt literacy tend to transact in high-cost manners, incurring higher fees and using high-cost borrowing. We provide a rough estimate of the national implications of debt ignorance on credit card costs by consumers. Less knowledgeable individuals also report that their debt loads are excessive or that they are unable to judge their debt position.

The Credit Card Debt Puzzle: The Role of Preferences, Credit Access Risk, and Financial Literacy
Abstract. We use the 1979 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to revisit what is termed the credit card debt puzzle: why consumers simultaneously co-hold high-interest credit card debt and low-interest assets that could be used to pay down this debt. Relative to individuals with no credit card debt but positive liquid assets, borrower-savers have very different perceptions of future credit access risk and use credit cards for precautionary motives. Moreover, changing perceptions about credit access risk are essential for predicting transitions among the two groups. Preferences and the composition of financial portfolios also play a role in these transitions.

The Credit Card Debt Puzzle and Noncognitive Ability
Abstract Many households concurrently hold low-yield liquid assets while incurring costly credit card debt. In our sample, more than 80% of households with credit card debt also have low-yield liquid assets. Using data from the Health and Retirement Study (N = 30,517), we examine the role of noncognitive skills as well as the economic, financial, and demographic factors that affect the likelihood of co-holding. We find that the “Big Five” personality traits have a statistically significant and economically important effect: households with a more agreeable, introvert, and less conscientious head of household are more likely to co-hold. We also examine the role of intra-household dynamics.

Disclosing the costs of co-holding liquid assets and high-interest debt has limited impact on behavior
Abstract Why do consumers simultaneously maintain low-yield liquid assets and high-interest revolving debt? This behavior, known as ``co-holding,'' affects 23\% of credit card users in our sample from a major international bank and costs the typical co-holder hundreds of dollars annually in unnecessary interest charges. Our analysis of 38 months of detailed banking records reveals that co-holding is remarkably persistent, with typical co-holders maintaining this behavior for most months observed. Our analysis also reveals that co-holding is not a static financial position: co-holders regularly deposit and withdraw from asset accounts while simultaneously making new credit card purchases. To test whether co-holding could be addressed through information disclosure, we conducted a large-scale field experiment (n = 125,328), providing clear information about co-holding behavior and its costs. Customers received targeted messages through their bank's mobile app, where they could easily transfer money from assets to pay down debt. Despite sufficient power to detect economically small effects, we found no meaningful changes in debt repayment amount, though customers did respond in other ways---making more frequent repayments and paying above required minimums. These results challenge explanations based on limited attention or information gaps and suggest that simple information disclosure, even when carefully designed and delivered through trusted channels, may not effectively address costly financial behaviors.

Household Need for Liquidity and the Credit Card Debt Puzzle
Abstract. In the 2001 U.S. Survey of Consumer Finances, 27% of households report simultaneously revolving significant credit card debt and holding sizeable

Keeping Cash and Revolving Debt: How Consumers' Preference for Spending on Debit versus Credit Influences their Decision to Co-Hold
This paper investigates "co-holding'"–whereby consumers simultaneously maintain low-yield liquid assets and high-interest revolving debt–through the l
The Co-Holding Puzzle: New Evidence from Transaction-Level Data
The tendency of consumers to hold low-yield liquid savings while simultaneously holding high-cost unsecured credit on revolving credit lines is a long standing
Credit Card Debt Puzzles and Debt Revolvers for Self Control
Abstract Most US credit card holders revolve high-interest debt, often with substantial liquid and retirement assets. We model separation of accounting from shopping allowed by credit cards, in a rational, dynamic game. When the shopper is more impatient than the accountant, selling assets to repay debt is not necessarily optimal, as the shopper can restore debt. Modest relative impatience generates asset-debt co-existence and target utilization rates, matching incidence and median assets of debt revolvers with substantial assets. Empirical evidence is consistent with a role for spending control considerations, after allowing for standard determinants of credit card debt.

Does Saving Cause Borrowing? Implications for the Co-Holding Puzzle
Using an experiment in which 3.1 million bank customers were encouraged to save, we explore the mechanisms behind co-holding liquid savings and credit card debt. Theoretically, we first show that the joint responses of spending, saving, and borrowing to the nudge differ for different economic models of co-holding. Using machine learning techniques, we then find that the most responsive individuals reduce spending and increase their savings by 4.9% (206 USD PPP per month) while their credit card debt remains unchanged. For them, the marginal responses to the nudge are consistent with our model of co-holding for the purpose of self- or partner control.

Credit card debt puzzle: liquid assets to pay household bills
Using transaction data from a US consumer payments diary, we revisit the credit card debt puzzle—a scenario in which households revolve credit card debt while also keeping liquid assets as bank account deposits. This scenario is very common: 42 percent of consumers in our sample were borrower-savers in 2019. We explain the puzzle by showing that consumers need their liquid assets to pay household bills and other necessary expenses, including mortgage or rent. More than 80 percent of bills by value were paid out of bank accounts and could not be charged to credit cards, so bank account balances were needed to cover those basic expenses. On average, borrower-savers’ credit card debt exceeded their liquid assets. The average borrower-saver carried almost $6,400 in unpaid credit card debt and had $5,400 in liquid assets. On average, the value of their liquid assets could cover only about 60 percent of their unpaid debt plus monthly bills. In almost every category of assets or debts, borrower-savers were worse off financially than savers. Thus, the differences between borrower-savers and savers are much broader than just their credit card debt and bank account balances; they extend to mortgage debt and home equity. Carrying a mortgage or other debt (such as auto or educational loans) is associated with a higher probability of revolving on a credit card, suggesting that various types of household debt might be complements rather than substitutes. We do not find evidence that either financial literacy scores or the “Big 5” personality traits predict whether a consumer is a borrower-saver. During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, bor-savs’ behavior was consistent with what we would expect under our explanation for the credit card puzzle. However, consumers’ unpaid credit card debt decreased, and their liquid assets increased, so the fraction of borrower-savers dropped to 35 percent of the sample.

The Co-holding Puzzle: New Evidence from Transaction-Level Data
Using detailed and highly disaggregated data on household finances, we examine the<br>tendency of consumers to “co-hold” savings and debt simultaneously. The di
Intra-Household Frictions, Anchoring, and the Credit Card Debt Puzzle
Abstract I study how intra-household frictions and anchoring contribute to the credit card debt puzzle, the co-holding of high-cost debt, and low-yield liquid assets. First, I find couples co-hold 42% more as units than as individuals relative to income. Moreover, in a natural experiment, couples do not cooperate to reduce high-cost debt, suggesting that intra-household frictions contribute to co-holding. Second, I find individuals who regularly make credit card debt payments equal to or near the minimum account for 59% of individual co-holding. The evidence suggests anchoring to the minimum payment contributes to co-holding via these low payments.

Co-holding behaviour: unlocking the puzzle
This article seeks to explain why households decide to simultaneously hold both credit and savings products. Beyond the arguments of ignorance or behavioural biases commonly used in the literature,...

Borrowing on the Wrong Credit Card? Evidence from Mexico
We establish new facts about the way consumers allocate debt among their credit cards using data for a representative sample of cardholders in Mexico. We find that relative prices are weak predictors of the allocation of debt, purchases, and payments. Consumers allocate a large fraction of their debt to high-interest cards, incurring a cost of 31 percent above the minimum. Using an experiment, we find that consumers do not substitute in the price margin, although they respond to salient temporary low-interest offers. We conclude that limited attention and mental accounting best rationalize our results and discuss implications for the market.
Disclosing the costs of co-holding liquid assets and high-interest debt has limited impact on behavior
Why do consumers simultaneously maintain low-yield liquid assets and high-interest revolving debt? This behavior, known as "co-holding," affects 23% o
On shifting consumers from high‐interest to low‐interest debt
Abstract In the United States, many consumers are increasingly accumulating debt, much of which is harmful and expensive. Prior research has devoted a great deal of attention to understanding why consumers generally get into debt and the strategies they can use to repay existing debts. While this work has furthered the agenda of helping consumers reduce or eliminate their overall debt balances, it has failed to emphasize the fact that for many consumers, debt may be unavoidable. This article aims to promote research that addresses not only overall debt reduction but also the need for consumers to shift from more to less costly types of debt. By shedding light on the psychological reasons why consumers may naturally gravitate toward more costly forms of debt when less costly ones may be available, we offer a novel perspective on why consumers get into and stay in debt longer than they should. This new angle has the potential to spur on further research into the ways consumers can use debt more effectively and less expensively in service of the overarching goal of debt reduction.
