Basel 2: FSA view on long-run PDs, Variable scalars & Stress testing. Dickon Brough Risk Model Review Financial Services Authority.

Similar documents
Supervisory Statement SS11/13 Internal Ratings Based (IRB) approaches. October 2017 (Updating June 2017)

Supervisory Statement SS11/13 Internal Ratings Based (IRB) approaches. December 2013 (Updated November 2015)

Assessing the modelling impacts of addressing Pillar 1 Ciclycality

Guidelines on PD estimation, LGD estimation and the treatment of defaulted exposures

Implementing IFRS 9 Impairment Key Challenges and Observable Trends in Europe

Direction. On a solo basis: Abbey National plc (the "principal firm(s)") Abbey National Treasury Services plc ("ANTS")

Guidelines on PD estimation, LGD estimation and the treatment of defaulted exposures

Basel II: Application requirements for New Zealand banks seeking accreditation to implement the Basel II internal models approaches from January 2008

Agenda on-site pre-application meeting INSTITUTION NAME Address (including city) DATE, start time / finish time

CP ON DRAFT RTS ON ASSSESSMENT METHODOLOGY FOR IRB APPROACH EBA/CP/2014/ November Consultation Paper

A response to the Prudential Regulation Authority s Consultation Paper CP29/16. Residential mortgage risk weights. October 2016

IFRS 9 Readiness for Credit Unions

What will Basel II mean for community banks? This

Expected Loss Models: Methodological Approach to IFRS9 Impairment & Validation Framework

PRO-CYCLICALITY IMPLICATIONS OF IFRS9 AND THE RWA FRAMEWORK

Financial Stability Institute

Financial Services Authority. Internal ratings-based probability of default models for income-producing real estate portfolios. Guidance Consultation

RCAP jurisdictional assessments: self-reporting monitoring template for RCAP follow-up actions

Graduated from Glasgow University in 2009: BSc with Honours in Mathematics and Statistics.

Managing Model Risk in Practice

RCAP jurisdictional assessments: self-reporting monitoring template for RCAP follow-up actions

Risk Based Capital in Banking (Basel II) APRIA Conference

EBA Report on IRB modelling practices

Consultation Paper. On Guidelines for the estimation of LGD appropriate for an economic downturn ( Downturn LGD estimation ) EBA/CP/2018/08

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY GUIDELINES ON STRESS TESTING FOR THE BERMUDA BANKING SECTOR

PROPOSAL FOR A REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms

Santander UK plc Additional Capital and Risk Management Disclosures

The procyclicality stress test Statement of expert group opinion

Guidelines. on PD estimation, LGD estimation and the treatment of defaulted exposures EBA/GL/2017/16 20/11/2017

CEBS Consultative Panel London, 18 February 2010

Enterprise-wide Scenario Analysis

Contents. Supplementary Notes on the Financial Statements (unaudited)

Building statistical models and scorecards. Data - What exactly is required? Exclusive HML data: The potential impact of IFRS9

Table of Contents. For further information contact: Investor Relations Warwick Bryan Phone: Facsimile: com.

IMPLEMENTATION NOTE. Corporate Governance Oversight at IRB Institutions

Supplementary Notes on the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Key Regulatory Metrics

Instructions for the EBA qualitative survey on IRB models

Consultative Document on reducing variation in credit risk-weighted assets constraints on the use of internal model approaches

IMPLEMENTATION NOTE. The Use of Ratings and Estimates of Default and Loss at IRB Institutions

Modeling Credit Correlations Using Macroeconomic Variables. Nihil Patel, Director

Comparative analysis of the Regulatory Capital calculation across major European jurisdictions. April 2013

Financial Instruments: Impairment Adapting to change

Finalising Basel II: The Way from the Third Consultative Document to Basel II Implementation

2014 Pillar 3 Report. Incorporating the requirements of APS 330 Half Year Update as at 31 March 2014

Bank Economic Capital An Australian Perspective. Bob Allen APRA Bank of Japan - Economic Capital Management Workshop 11 th July, 2007

Basel II and Financial Stability: Singapore s Experience

Opinion of the European Banking Authority on measures in accordance

Goldman Sachs Group UK (GSGUK) Pillar 3 Disclosures

TSB Banking Group plc. Significant Subsidiary Disclosures. 31 December 2015

UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Standard Chartered Bank Malaysia Berhad and its subsidiaries Pillar 3 Disclosures 31 December 2017

Summary of RBNZ response to submissions on the draft capital adequacy framework (internal models based approach)(bs2b)

2013 Risk & Capital Report

2011 Risk & Capital. Incorporating the requirements of APS 330

Contents 1 Overview Background Basis and frequency of disclosures Location and verification Scope

Myths & Pitfalls in PIT versus TTC Credit Risk Management The impact of subtleties

Advancing Credit Risk Management through Internal Rating Systems

Consultation Paper CP/EBA/2017/ March 2017

BCBS Developments in Credit Risk Regulation

Basel II Pillar 3 Capital Adequacy and Risk Disclosures. Determined to be better than we ve ever been. as at 31 December 2009

Basel III: Finalising post-crisis reforms

IFRS 9. Challenges and solutions. May 2016

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES

25 / 06 / 2008 APPLICATION OF THE BASEL II REFORM

Policy Statement PS23/17 Internal Ratings Based (IRB) approach: clarifying PRA expectations. October 2017

Box C The Regulatory Capital Framework for Residential Mortgages

Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited. Unaudited Supplementary Financial Information

on credit institutions credit risk management practices and accounting for expected credit losses

ICAC Annual Conference IFRS 9 Implementation Common Challenges & Possible Solutions

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES

BASEL III PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES. Building your future. Where home matters principality.co.uk

Dodd-Frank Act Company-Run Stress Test Disclosures

Consultation papers on estimation and identification of an economic downturn in IRB modelling. EBA Public Hearing, 31 May 2018

Non linearity issues in PD modelling. Amrita Juhi Lucas Klinkers

Consultation Paper CP5/17 Internal Ratings Based (IRB) approach: clarifying PRA expectations

Basel II Pillar 3 disclosures

Supplementary Notes on the Financial Statements (continued)

Capital Management in commercial and investment banking Back to the drawing board? Rolf van den Heever. ABSA Capital

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. High-level summary of Basel III reforms

BASEL II PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURE

Interim report January June 2017 for Nordea Hypotek AB (publ)

In various tables, use of - indicates not meaningful or not applicable.

Basel III Pillar 3 disclosures 2014

Capital & risk management

EBA REPORT RESULTS FROM THE 2016 HIGH DEFAULT PORTFOLIOS (HDP) EXERCISE. 03 March 2017

CECL Modeling FAQs. CECL FAQs

EBA /RTS/2018/04 16 November Final Draft Regulatory Technical Standards

In various tables, use of indicates not meaningful or not applicable.

Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited. Unaudited Supplementary Financial Information

Incorporating the requirements of APS 330 Half Year Update as at 31 March 2018

Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited. Unaudited Supplementary Financial Information

ROADMAP FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BASEL II IN PAKISTAN

Effective Computation & Allocation of Enterprise Credit Capital for Large Retail and SME portfolios

IRB framework, Regulatory requirements and expectations

Basel Compliant Modelling with Little or No Data

IFRS 9 METHODOLOGY: HOW DO YOU MEASURE UP?

Alexander Marianski August IFRS 9: Probably Weighted and Biased?

24.4 % Interim report Swedbank Mortgage AB 18 July Lending to the public, SEK bn. January June 2018 (July December 2017) Lending segments

24 June Dear Sir/Madam

Transcription:

Basel 2: FSA view on long-run PDs, Variable scalars & Stress testing Dickon Brough Risk Model Review Financial Services Authority 29 August 2007

IRB Mortgage Modelling IRB Waiver Approval Process Waiver approval process Number of applications and decisions Long-run PD Point-in-Time Vs Through-the-Cycle Variable Scalar Approaches Converting estimates from Point-in-Time to Through-the-Cycle Stress Testing Translate stress scenario into IRB parameters Use of stress testing outputs in Pillar 2 2

IRB Mortgage Modelling IRB Waiver Approval Process Waiver approval process Number of applications and decisions Long-run PD Point-in-Time Vs Through-the-Cycle Variable Scalar Approaches Converting estimates from Point-in-Time to Through-the-Cycle Stress Testing Translate stress scenario into IRB parameters Use of stress testing outputs in Pillar 2 3

IRB Waiver Approval Process Application Process Receive Application Project Plan Agreed Firm Review Decision Making Committee Waiver Issued Firm goes live Approx. 6 Months Approx. 6 Months 31 applications received to date: 27 for Credit Risk (IRB), 4 for Operational Risk (AMA) Recently completed assessment of large wave of IRB applications from the clearing banks, the principal investment banks and other firms 4 firms are currently using Basel 2 to calculate capital and more will start using this permission from Jan 2008 4

IRB Mortgage Modelling IRB Waiver Approval Process Waiver approval process Number of applications and decisions Long-run PD Point-in-Time Vs Through-the-Cycle Variable Scalar Approaches Converting estimates from Point-in-Time to Through-the-Cycle Stress Testing Translate stress scenario into IRB parameters Use of stress testing outputs in Pillar 2 5

Long-run PD Long-run PD Requirement: A firm must estimate PDs by grade from long-run averages of 1 year default rates (BIPRU 4.6.24) The long-run average must include default rates from a representative mix of good and bad years for the economy (CEBS 383) PDs must be forward-looking (CEBS 381) simple extrapolation from historical data is only starting point In Practice: i. Firms segment their portfolio into grades using underlying rating system (i.e. ii. iii. iv. scorecards in case of retail) Calculate historic annual default rates for each grade With average of historic default rates in (ii) giving the historic grade level PD Make necessary forward-looking adjustments Historic Annual Default Rate Grade Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Average PD 1 1.0% 1.5% 2.3% 1.8% 1.7% 2 2.0% 2.3% 3.0% 2.8% 2.5% 3 3.0% 3.4% 4.1% 3.9% 3.6% 6

Long-run PD The choice of drivers in the rating system could lead to two distinct PD modelling approaches: i. Point-in-time: An assessment of borrower risk at that particular pointin-time borrower will move up or down grades in line with the economic cycle A rating system containing cyclical variables would tend to be point-intime as the grade a borrower is assigned to will be dependent on the economic conditions ii. Through-the-cycle: long run assessment of the risk associated with a borrower which does not change with the economic cycle the borrower grade will not change due to economic conditions A rating system containing non-cyclical variables would tend to be throughthe-cycle.as the grade a borrower is assigned to will NOT be dependent on the economic conditions In practice most rating systems will contain both cyclical and non-cyclical drivers giving a hybrid between point-in-time and through-the-cycle 7

Long-run PD Point-in-Time As you enter a downturn, there is migration to lower rating grades But the actual default rates in each grade remain unchanged Result: a decrease in borrower credit quality increases the capital requirement Through-the-Cycle As you enter a downturn, there is no migration to lower rating grades But the actual default rates in each grade increases Result: capital requirement theoretically unchanged Long-run PD by grade does NOT change in either system as a result of the downturn A change in the distribution of the portfolio across the grades is a ratings migration which causes capital volatility 8

Long-run PD Portfolio PD Throughthe-Cycle Point-in-Time Hybrid Year The movement in Point-in-Time portfolio PD is a result of grade migration NOT changes in grade level PD A firm s desire to have point-in-time or through-the-cycle capital should guide their approach to modelling long-run PD how will changes in economic conditions effect your rating system? 9

Long-run PD Challenges for Retail Before Basel 2 the concept of managing portfolios using long-run default rates was not prevalent within retail firms Firms had traditionally assessed risk using recent data and the rating systems being adapted for Basel 2 are based on recent data This led to several practical challenges in complying with the long-run average. Theses challenges included: Rating system used newly acquired data sources for which historic default rates are unknown (e.g. bureau data) Data had not been stored in a way which enabled the historic default rates by grade to be calculated (e.g. data not at account level) Last UK recession occurred over 15 years ago Since then retail portfolios have changed markedly, questioning the relevance of data from this time. Using a combination of reasoned analysis and conservatism retail firms have estimate long-run PDs by grade Delivering a compliant rating system 10

IRB Mortgage Modelling IRB Waiver Approval Process Waiver approval process Number of applications and decisions Long-run PD Point-in-Time Vs Through-the-Cycle Variable Scalar Approaches Converting estimates from Point-in-Time to Through-the-Cycle Stress Testing Translate stress scenario into IRB parameters Use of stress testing outputs in Pillar 2 11

Variable Scalar Approaches Some Firms tried to comply with the long-run PD requirement by using more readably available historic portfolio level default experience The recent grade default rates were mapped to the average longrun portfolio default rate via the use of a scalar. The following is a typical non-compliant example of how this was done: i. Estimate long-run average portfolio default rate back until early 1990s ii. (e.g. 6%) Calculate portfolio level default rate given by rating system developed on recent data (e.g. 2%) iii. Divide long-run default rate by recent default rate to give scalar (e.g. 6% / 2% = 3) iv. Multiply rating system default rates by this scalar ensuring that final portfolio level PD equals the portfolio long-run average (e.g. 6%) This scalar approach was taking an initial point-in-time/hybrid rating system (e.g. the scorecards) and delivering the output of a throughthe-cycle rating system (i.e. the portfolio PD is always 6%) 12

Variable Scalar Approaches After much consideration within the FSA, we concluded that a variable scalar approach was acceptable in principle however this was subject to the following caveats: i. The firm can articulate how they see the scalar will varying with the economic ii. cycle The firm must be using the approach to obtain a through-the-cycle rating system and NOT simply to comply with the long-run average requirement iii. The firm must overcome the considerable conceptual and technical challenges in a way that ensures their current level of risk, and future changes in this level of risk are accounted for iv. The firm completes an additional 1-in-25 stress test using the default rates of the underlying (i.e. point-in-time/hybrid) rating system The FSA conclusions were published in a November 2006 CRSG paper The CRSG paper also articulated our concerns that firms taking the variable scalar approach would: Permanently tie their capital requirements to the performance of their historic portfolios Fail to meet the required standards 13

Variable Scalar Approaches The challenges referred to in caveat (ii) on the previous slide were listed as the following four practical challenges of developing a through-the-cycle rating system via the use of scalars: 1. All scalar calculations must take account of changes in default risks that are not purely related to changes in the economic cycle e.g. how does the scalar calculation differentiate between increased risk due to lending practices and increased risk due economic conditions 2. Firms must be able to accurately measure the long-run default rate of their current portfolio i.e. measure the performance of the current portfolio (within a constant market structure) under different economic conditions 3. Firms must use a data series of appropriate length in order to establish long-run default risk 4. Firms must ensure that the scalar is appropriate for all borrowers within the portfolio The long-run average default rate of a portfolio can only truly be measured by observing the default rates of the same portfolio with a constant market structure under different economic conditions 14

Variable Scalar Approaches The challenges in complying with the long-run average requirements are also relevant to a variable scalar approach Our experience is that retail firms have found it extremely challenging to develop a variable scalar approach and work is still needed Our thinking is still developing however, at this time, the most promising approach is based on: Segmenting portfolio by underlying drivers of default risk Estimating separate long-run default rates for each segment In practice this amounts to building a through-the-cycle rating system which estimates the average long-run default rates for homogenous risk segments of the portfolio Our latest thinking on the variable scalar approach has been sent to CRSG members for discussion at the September 2007 meeting: Use of variable scaling factors to derive long run probabilities of default for retail portfolios 15

Variable Scalar Approaches September 2007 CRSG paper: Firms must try to incorporate all non-cyclical drivers of risk within portfolio segmentation this will maximise the accuracy of the system The inclusion of non-cyclical drivers will lead to variable portfolio default rates and variable capital Drivers should capture both borrowers willingness (e.g. LTV) and ability (e.g. Debt-to-Income) to pay The drivers must reflect the firm s risk processes and lending policy and not selected purely based on statistical criteria The firms can expect the FSA to provide a robust challenge to not only the drivers chosen, but also those excluded The initial choice of long-run default rates is key As this will underpin the PD of the entire portfolio for some years to come The firm will need a governance process in place to provide a judgemental overlay 16

Variable Scalar Approaches September 2007 CRSG paper cont.: On a regular (at least an annual) basis a governance process will need to decide whether: - Realised default rates have changed a result of cyclical factors and the scalar has changed accordingly - New information suggests that both the PiT and long-run PDs need to be changed - New information suggests that the basis of the segmentation needs to be amended The firm will have to demonstrate that the information available is appropriate for making the decisions outlined above As for Retail business, the decisions seem likely to affect only the firm s capital requirements and not the day-to-day running of its business the FSA is sceptical of firms' ability to adequately maintain this governance process We will be looking for a high level of reassurance and commitment from firms' senior management in this regard 17

Variable Scalar Approaches September 2007 CRSG paper cont.: The high level conclusion from the paper is that a firm who wishes to use a variable scalar approach, and whose PiT models are acceptable, will be allowed to do so provided: i. It is able to meet principle 2 and 3 of the original CRSG paper (Nov 2006) ii. iii. It is able to produce a well thought out road map, supported by senior management, as to how principles 1 and 4 will be met to achieve full compliance with the FSA standards by end 2009 The PDs from the variable scalar approach will not be allowed to fall below the PDs from the underlying PiT models until it is deemed by the FSA to be in full compliance 18

IRB Mortgage Modelling IRB Waiver Approval Process Waiver approval process Number of applications and decisions Long-run PD Point-in-Time Vs Through-the-Cycle Variable Scalar Approaches Converting estimates from Point-in-Time to Through-the-Cycle Stress Testing Translate stress scenario into IRB parameters Use of stress testing outputs in Pillar 2 19

Stress Testing - Requirements Stress testing is an important component of Basel 2 framework FSA sees effective stress testing as essential component of risk management A key element of the Basel 2 stress testing is to demonstrate an understanding of what a firm s Capital requirements will be in adverse economic conditions Under Basel 1 a firm s capital requirements were not strongly cyclical Under Basel 2 a point-in-time rating system will give cyclical pillar 1 capital Firm must identify 1 in 25 stress test scenario and estimate the PD, LGD & EaD their rating system would given under these economic conditions. For example: What would be your credit score distribution under the 1 in 25 scenario? Would you still be applying the current downturn LGD (incorporating house price fall) once house prices have already decreased by 10%? Stress testing results are not independent of PD modelling approach The firm s ability to raise the additional capital needed under the stress test is assessed in pillar 2 20

Stress Testing 1 in 25 Results Through-the-Cycle: Potentially no additional capital same capital in all economic conditions Point-in-time: Capital level responds to economic conditions portfolio migrates to highest risk grades attracting higher long-run PD Point-in-Time Capital Estimates Throughthe-Cycle Hybrid 21

Basel 2: FSA view on long-run PDs, Variable scalars & Stress testing Dickon Brough Risk Model Review Financial Services Authority 29 August 2007