PRA published a letter from Sid Malik (Head of Division – Life Insurance and Pensions Risk, Insurance Supervision) to Chief Risk Officers of life insurers. The letter shares results from the recent survey on proxy modeling for the Solvency II calculations. PRA observed a wide range of practices in the survey responses, with no firm having adopted the best observed practices in all areas of proxy modeling. However, PRA recognizes that proxy modeling is an area where thinking and techniques continue to evolve. Given the wide range of practices observed in the survey, PRA is considering whether to issue a consultation on proposed expectations for how firms can continue to meet internal model tests and standards in respect of proxy modeling.
The purpose of this feedback is not to give an assessment of firms’ proxy models against the Solvency II internal model tests and standards, or of the PRA expectations on proxy modeling. PRA noted that the most appropriate approach for a firm will vary depending on the materiality and complexity of the risks modeled and firms should continue to be cognizant of these aspects when considering how their method compares to the best observed practice. PRA has divided its analysis into eight high-level categories, each representing a key area of the proxy model. These categories are use of the proxy model, fitting, out-of-sample testing, other testing, acceptance criteria, roll-forward, out-of-model adjustments, and documentation.
For internal model firms, PRA sets out the results of the industry survey, along with the firm-specific feedback. PRA has shared the details of best observed practices with all survey participants. Based on the survey response and documentation provided, PRA has highlighted where it has been concluded that the approach is or is not in line with the best observed practice. For standard formula firms, PRA sets out the results of the industry survey, which is information that has been provided to all survey participants. In the interest of transparency, PRA has also provided firm-specific feedback to other survey participants. PRA has not, however, included feedback specific to a firm.
Related Link: Letter
Keywords: Europe, UK, Insurance, Proxy Modelling, Life Insurers, Solvency II, Internal Model, Best Observed Practice, SCR, PRA
Previous ArticleBank of Italy Publishes Version 1.8 of AnaCredit Reporting Manual
FCA and PRA in the UK, FED in the US, and the authorities in Singapore have fined Goldman Sachs for risk management failures in connection with the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
BCBS announced that OSFI and the Bank of Canada hosted the 21st International Conference of Banking Supervisors (ICBS) virtually on October 19-22, 2020.
FCA proposed guidance on how firms should continue to seek to help customers who hold insurance and premium finance products and may be in financial difficulty because of COVID-19, after October 31, 2020.
EBA issued an opinion on prudential treatment of the legacy instruments as the grandfathering period nears an end on December 31, 2021.
ESRB published the fifth issue of the EU Non-bank Financial Intermediation Risk Monitor 2020 (NBFI Monitor).
HM Treasury announced that the new Financial Services Bill has been introduced in the Parliament.
APRA announced that it has increased the minimum liquidity requirement of Bendigo and Adelaide Bank for failing to comply with the prudential standard on liquidity.
PRA published the consultation paper CP17/20 to propose changes to certain rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
US Agencies adopted a final rule that applies to advanced approaches banking organizations and aims to reduce interconnectedness in the financial system as well as to reduce contagion risks associated with the failure of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB).
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) adopted a final rule that implements the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for certain large banking organizations.