ISDA Finds FRTB Results in Higher Capital Charges for Carbon Trading
The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) published a paper that explores the impact of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) on the trading of carbon certificates. The paper notes that FRTB would result in higher capital charges for carbon trading under the standardized approach to market risk, which could impair the ability of banks to act as intermediaries in the emissions trading system market globally; this is expected to have an adverse effect with respect to a key tool for policymakers to ensure a cost-effective transition to a carbon-neutral economy. The analysis suggests that including the lower risk-weight of 37% and the higher tenor correlation of 0.996 would result in a 60% reduction in capital requirements, based on the simplified example for a typical carry position of a bank.
The ESG Risk and Capital Working Group of ISDA has developed this paper, which also investigates whether a more conservative treatment of carbon credit trading in the FRTB is justified from a risk perspective as ISDA believes it is important the regulatory treatment of assets is justified from a risk perspective. This is particularly important for carbon certificates, as inappropriate levels of capital would impact the functioning of this market and affect the willingness of institutions to invest in the transformation to a green economy. The results of the ISDA analysis suggest that FRTB in its current form unduly penalizes carbon-credit trading. The treatment of carbon certificates, as per FRTB, appears out of sync with the underlying risks in the following two key areas:
- Risk-weight of carbon certificates. The results of the analysis suggest the risk-weight for carbon certificates under the standardized approach to market risk is set too high. Based on the estimated stressed-period volatilities of carbon certificates, ISDA believes a risk-weight of nearly 37% would be more appropriate. This is less than two-third of the 60% risk-weight currently prescribed by FRTB framework. Viewed in isolation (disregarding spillover effects to other parts of the portfolio), this would imply a lower capital charge of close to 40%.
- Penalization of carry positions. For commodities with physical storage costs, fluctuations in such costs imply a carry position is not a perfect hedge. Consequently, FRTB imposes a correlation of 0.99 between spot and forward positions. However, carbon certificates are not typical commodities as there are no physical storage costs. Therefore, a much higher correlation for carbon certificates is appropriate. ISDA recommends setting a tenor correlation parameter (medium correlation scenario) for carbon certificates of 0.995-0.999, reflecting empirical observations. An alternative to updating the tenor correlation parameter could be to extend the exemption for pure stock financing from the simplified standardized approach to the standardized approach. This would result in positions where a physical stock has been sold forward being excluded from the commodities risk calculation, which would function as an exemption for carry positions of carbon emission certificates.
According to the ISDA Chief Executive Officer Scott O'Malia, in its current form, FRTB would lead to disproportionately high capital requirements for carbon certificates, which would constrain banks’ ability to support the global reduction of emissions. Ultimately banks will make their own decisions about the businesses in which they are active. However, if the regulatory framework penalizes them with unduly high capital requirements for the trading of carbon certificates, they will naturally retreat from that market. Policymakers tend to agree that carbon trading will be central to the success of the global drive toward net zero in the years ahead. Basel III must be appropriately calibrated to avoid thwarting progress on climate change.
Related Links
Keywords: International, Banking, FRTB, Climate Change Risk, Carbon Trading, ESG, Basel, Standardized Approach, Market Risk, Regulatory Capital, Transition Risk, ISDA
Featured Experts
María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer
Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Patrycja Oleksza
Applies proficiency and knowledge to regulatory capital and reporting analysis and coordinates business and product strategies in the banking technology area
Previous Article
IOSCO Proposes Recommendations on ESG Ratings and Data ProvidersRelated Articles
BIS and Central Banks Experiment with GenAI to Assess Climate Risks
A recent report from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub details Project Gaia, a collaboration between the BIS Innovation Hub Eurosystem Center and certain central banks in Europe
Nearly 25% G-SIBs Commit to Adopting TNFD Nature-Related Disclosures
Nature-related risks are increasing in severity and frequency, affecting businesses, capital providers, financial systems, and economies.
Singapore to Mandate Climate Disclosures from FY2025
Singapore recently took a significant step toward turning climate ambition into action, with the introduction of mandatory climate-related disclosures for listed and large non-listed companies
SEC Finalizes Climate-Related Disclosures Rule
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized the long-awaited rule that mandates climate-related disclosures for domestic and foreign publicly listed companies in the U.S.
EBA Proposes Standards Related to Standardized Credit Risk Approach
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has been taking significant steps toward implementing the Basel III framework and strengthening the regulatory framework for credit institutions in the EU
US Regulators Release Stress Test Scenarios for Banks
The U.S. regulators recently released baseline and severely adverse scenarios, along with other details, for stress testing the banks in 2024. The relevant U.S. banking regulators are the Federal Reserve Bank (FED), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).
Asian Governments Aim for Interoperability in AI Governance Frameworks
The regulatory landscape for artificial intelligence (AI), including the generative kind, is evolving rapidly, with governments and regulators aiming to address the challenges and opportunities presented by this transformative technology.
EBA Proposes Operational Risk Standards Under Final Basel III Package
The European Union (EU) has been working on the final elements of Basel III standards, with endorsement of the Banking Package and the publication of the European Banking Authority (EBA) roadmap on Basel III implementation in December 2023.
EFRAG Proposes XBRL Taxonomy and Standard for Listed SMEs Under ESRS
The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), which plays a crucial role in shaping corporate reporting standards in European Union (EU), is seeking comments, until May 21, 2024, on the Exposure Draft ESRS for listed SMEs.
ECB to Expand Climate Change Work in 2024-2025
Banking regulators worldwide are increasingly focusing on addressing, monitoring, and supervising the institutions' exposure to climate and environmental risks.
