European Parliament published a research paper that examines how demanding and consistent is the 2018 stress test design in comparison to the previous exercises. The 2018 EBA EU-wide stress test exercise is similar to previous exercises in terms of the employed methodology.
The major change compared to the 2016 exercise is that the 2018 exercise incorporates, for the first time, the IFRS 9 accounting standards, which contributes to the increased severity of the exercise. Accordingly, banks are requested to account for credit impairments associated with their riskier loans not only over a twelve-month period, but also in a lifetime horizon. The stress testing methodology also incorporates several measures to guarantee internal consistency. However, despite all the progress made in designing the exercise, there remain critical areas such as the application of a static-balance-sheet assumption, the under representation of liquidity risk, and the implications of the lack of a fail-pass threshold. The paper suggests that improvements in these areas can enhance reliability of stress test results and empower their role as external and internal communication tools.
EBA, in 2018, has required 48 significant banks covering roughly 70% of the banking sector assets in EU to perform a stress test to assess their resilience during 2018–2020. The exercise is based on a common methodology and a set of templates that capture starting point data (year-end 2017 figures) and stress test results. The results will be published on November 02, 2018. As in the 2016 exercise, there is no pass-fail threshold, but results will be input to the supervisory review and evaluation (SREP) process, under which decisions are made on appropriate capital resources and forward-looking capital plans. Similar to the 2016 exercise, the 2018 EU-wide stress test is based on common methodology and a “constrained bottom-up” approach,that is, banks make their projections but are subject to strict constraints and simplifying assumptions.
Related Link: Research Paper (PDF)
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Stress Testing, 2018 EU Stress Testing, ECL, IFRS 9, European Parliament, EBA
PRA published a statement that explains when to expect further information on the PRA approach to transposing the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5), including its approach to revisions to the definition of capital for Pillar 2A.
SRB published the work program for 2021-2023, setting out a roadmap to further operationalize the Single Resolution Fund and to achieve robust resolvability of banks under its remit over the next three years.
EIOPA is consulting on the relevant ratios to be mandatorily disclosed by insurers and reinsurers falling within the scope of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive as well as on the methodologies to build these ratios.
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) issued a joint statement encouraging banks to cease entering into new contracts that use USD LIBOR as a reference rate as soon as practicable and in any event by December 31, 2021, to facilitate an orderly LIBOR transition.
The Group of Central Bank Governors and Heads of Supervision (GHOS), the oversight body of BCBS, endorsed a coordinated approach to mitigate COVID-19 risks to the global banking system.
HM Treasury extended the consultation period on Phase II of the Future Regulatory Framework (FRF) Review, from January 19, 2021 to February 19, 2021.
ECB finalized guidance on the way it expects banks to prudently manage and transparently disclose climate and other environmental risks under the current prudential rules.
BCBS published a technical amendment to the capital treatment of securitizations of non-performing loans by banks.
PRA published the policy statement PS23/20 on the calculation of stressed value at risk (sVAR) and risks not in value at risk (RNIV) under the market risk framework.
BoE announced that the Data and Statistics Division is planning to move collection of statistical data to the BoE Electronic Data Submission (BEEDS) portal.