EBA Report Examines Impact of Implementation of Basel III Reforms

The cumulative impact analysis of the report uses a sample of 106 banks, split between 40 Group 1 banks and 66 Group 2 banks. Group 1 banks are banks that have tier 1 capital in excess of EUR 3 billion and are internationally active. All other banks are labeled as Group 2 banks. The Basel III capital monitoring report shows the results separately for Group 1 and Group 2 banks. The results do not reflect the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on participating banks as the reference date of this impact assessment is December 2019.  For three G-SIIs that are outliers owing to overly conservative assumptions under the revised market risk framework, the results showing reduced estimation bias assume zero change between the current and the revised market risk framework. The following are some key findings of the Basel III monitoring exercise:

• Compared with the current fully phased‐in Capital Requirements Regulation and Directive (CRR/CRD IV), under Basel III full implementation, the Tier 1 capital shortfall increases for all banks, but particularly for global systemically important institutions or G‐SIIs.
• When considering the entire sample of banks, the risk‐based capital ratios, namely the common equity tier 1, tier 1, and total capital ratios, decline by 240, 260, and 290 basis points, respectively, following the implementation of the reform.
• The leverage ratio is slightly higher under the current regime, than under the revised (final Basel III) framework (5.4% versus 5.3%, respectively), when the entire sample is considered. The decline in risk‐based ratios is slightly larger for Group 1 banks than for Group 2 banks.
• Excluding the leverage ratio contribution, the impact of the reforms is 18.3%, of which the leading factors are the output floor (6.2%) and credit risk (5%).
• In December 2019, EU banks required additional stable funding of EUR 24.3 billion to fulfil the minimum net stable funding ratio (NSFR) requirement of 100%. Compared with the June 2019 exercise, the shortfall of stable funding decreased by EUR 9.4 billion. The improvement is mainly attributable to Group 1 banks (EUR 16.4 billion versus EUR 29.3 billion in previous report), which compensate for a slight worsening for Group 2 banks (EUR 8 billion versus EUR 4.3 billion). Taking a longer‐term perspective, for the constant sample of banks over time, it can be observed that the compliance with the NSFR has steadily improved since the start of the monitoring exercise in June 2011. 
• For three Global Systemically Important institutions, that are outliers owing to overly conservative assumptions under the revised market risk framework, the results showing "reduced estimation bias" assume zero change between the current and the revised market risk framework. According to the “conservative estimation,” based on the original conservative assumptions, the total impact would be 16.7%, with a total risk-based impact of 19.7% and market risk impact of 2.3%.

EBA plans to publish, on December 15, 2020, a more detailed ad hoc report that will respond to the EC Call for Advice on Basel III, based on the same reference date. The cumulative results of the present report are not directly comparable to those of the EC Call for Advice, as they are based on slightly different samples and on two key methodological differences.

Related Links

• Press Release
• Report (PDF)
• Interactive Tool

Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Basel III Monitoring, Credit Risk, Operational Risk, CRR/CRD, Regulatory Capital, G-SII, Basel, Market Risk, Liquidity Risk, EBA