The global nancial crisis has led to an increased focus on identifying systemically-important nancial institutions and on assessing to what extent they contribute to risks in the nancial system. However, producing an identi cation method is complicated and associated with several dif cult choices. This article provides some guidance on how to design methods for identifying systemically-important banks in Sweden. Both simple and advanced indicators are used. One conclusion is that the systemic importance of the four major Swedish banks varies considerably over time. It is also apparent that the different indicators can provide different results for the ranking of systemically- important banks, despite the fact that each indicator in itself provides a rather constant ranking over time. The different indicators of systemic importance should therefore be able to complement each other to a great degree. This suggests that several different indicators may be needed when assessing the risks in individual banks and the system as a whole.