FED Issues Report on Results of 2021 Stress Tests for Banks
FED published the results of the stress tests for banks for 2021. The aggregate results of Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test (DFAST) 2021 suggest the 23 firms that participated in the supervisory stress test would experience substantial losses under the severely adverse scenario; however, these firms would remain well above the minimum risk-based requirements and could continue lending to businesses and households. Thus, all additional, temporary capital distribution restrictions imposed following the outbreak of COVID-19 will expire on June 30, 201. FED also corrected error with the results for BNP Paribas USA from the June and December 2020 stress tests, making corrections to the projected pre-provision net revenue, projected pre-tax net income, and projected capital ratios.
The report provides details of the supervisory severely adverse scenario used in DFAST 2021 and an overview of the analytical framework and methods used to generate the projected results, highlighting several changes for DFAST 2021. It also presents the results of the supervisory stress test under the severely adverse scenario for the firms that participated in DFAST 2021, presented both in the aggregate and for individual firms. This year's hypothetical scenario included a severe global recession with substantial stress in the commercial real estate and corporate debt markets. Gross domestic product falls 4% from the fourth quarter of 2020 through the third quarter of 2022 while asset prices decline sharply, with a 55% decline in equity prices. Under the hypothetical scenario, the 23 large banks would collectively lose more than USD 470 billion, with nearly USD 160 billion losses from commercial real estate and corporate loans. However, their capital ratios would decline to 10.6%, from an actual 13.0% in the fourth quarter of 2020, before rising to 11.2% at the end of the first quarter of 2023, still more than double their minimum requirements.
he aggregate common equity tier 1 (CET1) ratio remains well above the required minimum levels throughout the projection horizon. The larger decline in aggregate CET1 capital ratios compared with DFAST 2020 is due in part to lower projected pre-provision net revenue resulting from a flatter yield curve and a larger share of low-yielding assets on bank balance sheets. Aggregate losses under the DFAST 2021 severely adverse scenario are projected to be USD 474 billion, of which USD 353 billion are projected loan losses. Both aggregate and loan losses are little changed from DFAST 2020. FED notes that large firms will remain subject to the normal restrictions imposed by the regulatory capital framework of FED, inclusive of the stress capital buffer (SCB). The firms participating in DFAST 2021 will be subject to the SCB requirements based on the DFAST 2021 results beginning October 01, 2021.
Related Links
Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, Stress Testing, DFAST, Dodd-Frank Act, COVID-19, Severely Adverse Scenario, Commercial Real Estate, Stress Capital Buffer, Regulatory Capital, Basel, FED
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.
James Partridge
Credit analytics expert helping clients understand, develop, and implement credit models for origination, monitoring, and regulatory reporting.
Previous Article
European Authorities Issue Statement on LIBOR CessationRelated Articles
BoE Consults on Approach to Setting MREL, Publishes Bail-In Guidance
The Bank of England (BoE) published a consultation paper on approach to setting minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL), an operational guide on executing bail-in, and a statement from the Deputy Governor Dave Ramsden.
EBA Seeks Views on Proportionality Assessment Methodology
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is seeking preliminary input on standardization of the proportionality assessment methodology for credit institutions and investment firms.
US Agencies Propose Changes to Call Reports and Instructions
Certain regulatory authorities in the US are extending period for completion of the review of certain residential mortgage provisions and for publication of notice disclosing the determination of this review until December 20, 2021.
PRA Finalizes Rulebook Definition of Higher Paid Material Risk-Taker
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the policy statement PS18/21, which introduces an amendment in the definition of "higher paid material risk taker" in the Remuneration Part of the PRA Rulebook.
EBA Examines Asset Encumbrance in Banking Sector
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published its annual report on asset encumbrance in banking sector.
EBA Publishes Methodological Guide to Mystery Shopping
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a methodological guide to mystery shopping.
APRA Issues Update on Capital Reform Policy Settings for Banks
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) released a letter to authorized deposit-taking institutions to provide an update on key policy settings for the capital framework reforms, which will come into effect from January 01, 2023.
CPMI-IOSCO Assess Continuity Planning of Market Infrastructures
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) published a report that assesses the business continuity planning activities of financial market infrastructures or FMIs.
BoE Announces Changes to Validation Rules for Form BTL
The Bank of England (BoE) published questions and answers (Q&A) on OSCA to BEEDS migration for statistical reporting as well a presentation from the project overview session held with statistical reporters.
BCBS Proposes Changes to Process for Reviewing G-SIB Methodology
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is consulting on a technical amendment to the Basel Framework to reflect a new process reviewing the global systemically important bank (G-SIB) assessment methodology.
