FED published a document providing additional information on its stress testing program. This additional information follows the finalized changes, which were published in February 2019 and intended to enhance the transparency of its stress tests without compromising the ability to test the resilience of the largest banks in the nation. The document provides details about the models developed or selected by FED for use in the supervisory stress test.
Additional information on loss rates is provided for the models used for corporate loans and credit cards. These two models accounted for roughly half of the total projected loan losses in the 2018 stress test of FED. Similar information will be provided in 2020 for two additional models. The additional information consists of the following:
- Ranges of loss rates, projected using the models of FED for loans that are grouped by distinct risk characteristics
- Portfolios of hypothetical loans with loss rates projected by the models of FED
- Enhanced descriptions of the models of FED
The document provides an overview of the general approach to supervisory model development and validation in stress testing, also summarizing the supervisory modeling framework and methodology. The document includes detailed description of the supervisory stress test models and contains additional disclosures for certain material portfolios, including modeled loss rates on pools of loans and loss rates associated with portfolios of hypothetical loans. Finally, Appendix A to the document describes a comprehensive list of supervisory model changes effective for Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test (DFAST) in 2019.
Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, Stress-Testing, DFAST, Stress Test Models, CCAR, FED
Previous ArticleFSB to Address Too-Big-to-Fail, Shadow Banking, and Fintech Risks
BIS published a paper that provides an overview on the use of big data and machine learning in the central bank community.
APRA finalized the reporting standard ARS 115.0 on capital adequacy with respect to the standardized measurement approach to operational risk for authorized deposit-taking institutions in Australia.
ECB published a guide that outlines the principles and methods for calculating the penalties for regulatory breaches of prudential requirements by banks.
MAS and The Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) jointly issued a paper that sets out good practices for the management of operational and other risks stemming from new work arrangements adopted by financial institutions amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
ACPR announced that a new data collection application, called DLPP (Datalake for Prudential), for collecting banking and insurance prudential data will go into production on April 12, 2021.
BCB announced that the Financial Stability Committee decided to maintain the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) for Brazil at 0%, at least until the end of 2021.
EIOPA has launched a European-wide comparative study on non-life underwriting risk in internal models, also kicking-off of the data collection phase.
SRB published an overview of the resolution tools available in the Banking Union and their impact on a bank’s ability to maintain continuity of access to financial market infrastructure services in resolution.
EBA is consulting on the implementing technical standards for Pillar 3 disclosures on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks, as set out in requirements under Article 449a of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
ESAs Issue Advice on KPIs on Sustainability for Nonfinancial Reporting