BCBS published the results of its latest Basel III monitoring exercise, based on data as of December 31, 2018. The report sets out the impact of the Basel III framework that was initially agreed in 2010 as well as the effects of the December 2017 finalization of the Basel III reforms. For the first time, the report also reflects the finalization of the market risk framework published in January 2019. The results show that the changes in minimum required capital from fully phased-in final Basel III remain stable for large internationally active banks compared with end-2017, including the recently re-calibrated market risk standards. Liquidity ratios also remain stable compared with the end-June 2018 results.
This exercise covers data from 181 banks. This includes 105 "Group 1" banks that are defined as internationally active banks with have tier 1 capital of more than EUR 3 billion; this group includes all 29 institutions that have been designated as global systemically important banks (G-SIBs). The sample also includes 76 "Group 2" banks, which are banks that have tier 1 capital of less than EUR 3 billion or are not internationally active. The monitoring exercise covered Basel III capital as well as liquidity requirements.
The final Basel III minimum requirements are expected to be implemented by January 01, 2022 and fully phased in by January 01, 2027. On a fully phased-in basis, the capital shortfalls at the end-December 2018 reporting date are EUR 23.5 billion for Group 1 banks at the target level. These shortfalls are almost 75% smaller than in the end-2015 cumulative QIS exercise, thanks mainly to higher levels of eligible capital. For Group 1 banks, the tier 1 minimum required capital would increase by 3.0%, following full phasing-in of the final Basel III standards relative to the initial Basel III standards. This compares with an increase of 3.2% at end-2017. On average, at end-June 2018, the total change in tier 1 minimum required capital at the target level was higher at 5.3% for Group 1 banks. This higher increase was largely driven by the higher market risk impact prior to the application of the re-calibrated 2019 standard.
In terms of Basel III liquidity requirements, the weighted average liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) for the Group 1 bank sample was 136% on December 31, 2018, compared with 135% six months earlier. For Group 2 banks, the weighted average LCR remained declined slightly from 180% to 177%. All but two banks in the sample reported an LCR that met or exceeded the final 100% minimum requirement. The weighted average net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for the Group 1 bank sample remained stable at 116%, while for Group 2 banks the average NSFR increased slightly to 120%. As of December 2018, 94% of the Group 1 banks and 95% of the Group 2 banks in the NSFR sample reported a ratio that met or exceeded 100%, while all banks reported an NSFR at or above 90%.
Keywords: International, Banking, Basel III Monitoring, QIS, Regulatory Capital, Liquidity Risk, LCR, NSFR, Market Risk, BCBS
Previous ArticlePRA Releases New and Updated Versions of PRA 110 LMM Tool
EIOPA submitted—to the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and EC—its 2020, fifth, and last annual report on long-term guarantee measures and measures on equity risk.
The BIS Innovation Hub Swiss Centre, SNB, and the financial infrastructure operator SIX announced the successful completion of a joint proof-of-concept (PoC) experiment as part of the Project Helvetia.
EBA published the final draft regulatory technical standards for calculation of own funds requirements for market risk, under the standardized and internal model approaches of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) framework.
EIOPA published discussion paper on a methodology for the potential inclusion of climate change in the Solvency II (sometimes also written as SII) standard formula when calculating natural catastrophe underwriting risk.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, corrigenda to the Directive and the Regulation on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.
MAS proposed amendments to certain regulations, notices, and guidelines arising from the Banking (Amendment) Act 2020.
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.
RBNZ launched consultations on the scope of the Insurance Prudential Supervision Act (IPSA) 2010 and on the associated Insurance Solvency Standards.
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.