General Information & Client Services
  • Americas: +1.212.553.1653
  • Asia: +852.3551.3077
  • China: +86.10.6319.6580
  • EMEA: +44.20.7772.5454
  • Japan: +81.3.5408.4100
Media Relations
  • New York: +1.212.553.0376
  • London: +44.20.7772.5456
  • Hong Kong: +852.3758.1350
  • Tokyo: +813.5408.4110
  • Sydney: +61.2.9270.8141
  • Mexico City: +001.888.779.5833
  • Buenos Aires: +0800.666.3506
  • São Paulo: +0800.891.2518
April 25, 2018

During the keynote speech at the ISDA Annual General Meeting, William Coen, the Secretary General of BCBS, discussed the market risk framework, which is the one element of the post-crisis reform agenda has yet to be fully finalized. He mainly answered three questions: why has BCBS revised the market risk framework, why has it taken so long to complete, and how do we get the framework finished in a timely manner?

According to him, one reason for revisions is that the pre-crisis market risk framework was in need of major repair. The weaknesses exposed by the crisis revealed the shortcomings in banks’ own risk management practices and the limitations of models in general. The review sought to address shortcomings in the regime’s design as well as weaknesses in risk measurement under both the internal models-based and standardized approaches, including the trading book/banking book boundary, incorporating the risk of market illiquidity, enhancing the robustness and risk-sensitivity of the standardized approach, and capitalizing against tail risk. As part of finalizing the Basel III framework last year, ongoing challenges in implementing certain bank capital reforms were acknowledged by the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision (GHOS), the Committee’s oversight body. Accordingly, the GHOS endorsed the Committee's proposal to extend the implementation date of the revised market risk framework from 2019 to January 01, 2022 (for both the implementation and first regulatory reporting date for the revised framework). Deferring its implementation will also align the framework’s starting date with those of the Basel III revisions for credit risk and operational risk. It will give banks more time to develop the systems needed to apply it.

He also stressed the importance of having a framework that can be realistically implemented by banks and jurisdictions. In postponing its implementation date, GHOS members reaffirmed that they expect the framework’s full, timely, and consistent implementation. To meet this expectation, the framework needs to be designed in a way that can be implemented by internationally active banks and adequately overseen by supervisors. While there may be sound conceptual reasons for pursuing a specific approach or making a particular revision to the market risk framework, it is in no one’s interest to end up with a framework that cannot be adequately implemented. He also added that the Committee’s experience with its market risk quantitative impact study (QIS) is “telling.” The Committee has conducted many quantitative exercises on market risk, both before and after the publication of the market risk framework, with a QIS exercise currently under way. While the quality of data submitted by banks has improved over time, data quality concerns remain. Thus, a significant proportion of bank data has been excluded from the Committee’s analysis. These deficiencies may simply reflect the gradual adjustment of banks’ systems to the revised framework. Consequently, the Committee has in some areas been left with a small sample of observations to finalize certain outstanding revisions. This points to the importance of banks providing complete and robust trading book data submissions for the current QIS exercise as well as providing concrete evidence to the questions posed in the consultation to facilitate the standard’s finalization.

An important consideration for the Committee is whether the framework adequately balances simplicity, comparability and risk sensitivity. The Committee will need to consider whether simpler and more robust approaches should be included in the revised market risk framework. In conclusion, he also emphasized that there is a clear expectation for full, timely, and consistent implementation of the Basel III standards. This includes the January 01, 2022 implementation date of the market risk framework, as reaffirmed last month by the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. “The Committee will increasingly be focused on meeting this expectation, ” said Mr. Coen.

 

Related Link: Speech

Keywords: International, Banking, Market Risk, Basel III, BCBS

Related Insights
News

CBB Proposes and Finalizes Rulebook Modules for Banks in November 2018

CBB announced the issuance of new leverage ratio requirements under Module CA (Part 3) for Islamic (Chapter CA-10) and conventional bank licensees (Chapter CA-15).

November 15, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

OFR on Financial Stability Risks in Its 2018 Annual Report to Congress

OFR released its 2018 Annual Report to Congress, which examines risks to the financial stability in the United States.

November 15, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

IAIS Publishes Drafts of Revised ICP 8, ICP 15, ICP 16, and ICP 20

IAIS published the drafts of revised Insurance Core Principles on Public Disclosure (ICP 20), Investments (ICP 15), Enterprise Risk Management for Solvency Purposes (ICP 16), and Risk Management and Internal Controls (ICP 8), along with a revised draft of the glossary on enterprise risk management (ERM).

November 14, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

MAS Amends Notice 637 on Capital Adequacy Requirements in Singapore

MAS published the final, revised Notice 637 on the risk-based capital adequacy requirements in Singapore.

November 13, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

ESMA Updates Q&A on Implementation of CSD Regulation and MAR

ESMA updated questions and answers (Q&A) documents on the implementation of the Central Securities Depository (CSD) Regulation and Market Abuse Regulation (MAR).

November 12, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

FSB Finalizes and Publishes the Cyber Lexicon

FSB published a cyber lexicon, following the public consultation earlier this year.

November 12, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

SRB Updates Liability Data Reporting Template for 2019

SRB published version 2.7.1 of the Liability Data Reporting (LDR) Template.

November 12, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

ECB to Conduct Comprehensive Assessment of Six Bulgarian Banks

ECB will undertake a comprehensive assessment of six Bulgarian banks. The exercise, comprising an asset quality review and a stress test, follows Bulgaria’s submission of a request to establish close cooperation with ECB on July 18, 2018.

November 12, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

SRB Publishes the Work Program for 2019

SRB published the work program for 2019, which sets out its priorities and core tasks for the year ahead.

November 12, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

IMF Publishes Reports on the 2018 Article IV Consultation with Chile

IMF published its staff report and selected issues report under the 2018 Article IV consultation with Chile.

November 09, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 2211