General Information & Client Service
  • Americas: +1.212.553.1653
  • Asia: +852.3551.3077
  • China: +86.10.6319.6580
  • EMEA: +44.20.7772.5454
  • Japan: +81.3.5408.4100
Media Relations
  • New York: +1.212.553.0376
  • London: +44.20.7772.5456
  • Hong Kong: +852.3758.1350
  • Tokyo: +813.5408.4110
  • Sydney: +61.2.9270.8141
  • Mexico City: +001.888.779.5833
  • Buenos Aires: +0800.666.3506
  • São Paulo: +0800.891.2518
November 27, 2018

FSI published a paper that presents the findings of a comparative analysis on the system-wide stress tests for banks in the euro area, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States. The paper identifies three building blocks in the setup of any stress test—governance, implementation, and outcomes—and relates them to the policy objectives, which can be micro-prudential or macro-prudential.

On the basis of an extensive review of the choices that authorities need to make about the design of a stress test within each of these building blocks, the paper argues that stress tests are most effective when their design is fully aligned with the policy objectives associated with them. This is because micro-prudential and macro-prudential objectives may require different approaches. Consistency with the Basel Committee's high-level principles for stress testing is an important step in this regard. Stress tests are best used in combination with other tools available to the authorities to achieve their policy objectives, such as systemic risk monitoring or capital planning reviews.

The analysis suggests that stress testing is being continually improved and further developments could help to enhance the implementation and the policy use of stress tests. There are several areas in which stress tests could be improved, such as, on the implementation side, the joint treatment of solvency and liquidity risks, or the specification of second-round, spillover and contagion effects. On the policy side, more authorities could use stress tests as an input to the calibration of macro-prudential measures. Additionally, stress tests could be further integrated into regular supervisory reviews.

Some of these changes will be driven by progress in research or advances in technology, while others will be dependent on gaining enough practical experience, especially in the macro-prudential sphere. From a global perspective, a dialog among relevant authorities regarding a common scenario design for large and cross-border active banks would be a helpful addition to the stress testing landscape.


Related Links

Keywords: International, Banking, Stress Testing, Systemic Risk, Macro-prudential Policy, FSI

Related Insights

EBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Second Update for January 2019

EBA published answers to eight questions under the Single Rulebook question and answer (Q&A) updates for this week.

January 18, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

BCBS Finds Liquidity Risk Management Principles Remain Fit for Purpose

BCBS completed a review of its 2008 Principles for sound liquidity risk management and supervision. The review confirmed that the principles remain fit for purpose.

January 17, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

MAS Guidelines on Risk Mitigation Requirements for OTC Derivatives

MAS published guidelines on risk mitigation requirements for non-centrally cleared over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives contracts.

January 17, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

HKMA Urges Local Banks to Start Working on FRTB Implementation

HKMA announced that it plans to issue a consultation paper on the new market risk standard in the second quarter of 2019.

January 17, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

EBA Finalizes Guidelines for High-Risk Exposures Under CRR

EBA published the final guidelines on the specification of types of exposures to be associated with high risk under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). The guidelines are intended to facilitate a higher degree of comparability in terms of the current practices in identifying high-risk exposures.

January 17, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

BoE Publishes the Schedule for Statistical Reporting for 2019

BoE published the updated schedule for statistical reporting for 2019. The reporting institutions use the online statistical data application (OSCA) to submit statistical data to BoE.

January 16, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

PRA Delays Final Direction on Reporting of Private Securitizations

PRA and FCA have delayed the issuance of final direction, including the final template, on reporting of private securitizations, from January 15, 2019 to the end of January 2019.

January 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

SNB Updates Forms on Supervisory Reporting for Banks

SNB published Version 1.7 of reporting forms (AUR_U, AUR_UEA, AUR_UES, AURH_U, AUR_K, AUR_KEA, and AURH_K) and the related documentation for supervisory reporting on an individual and consolidated basis.

January 15, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

BCBS Finalizes Market Risk Capital Framework and Work Program for 2019

BCBS published the final framework for market risk capital requirements and its work program for 2019. Also published was an explanatory note to provide a non-technical description of the overall market risk framework, the changes that have been incorporated into in this version of the framework and impact of the framework.

January 14, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News

EBA Single Rulebook Q&A: First Update for January 2019

EBA published answers to 13 questions under the Single Rulebook question and answer (Q&A) updates for this week.

January 11, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 2480