IMF published a working paper that reviews the key limitations of the Basel Credit Gap (BCG) and proposes two alternative approaches that can complement the BCG when assessing credit excesses or deciding whether to activate the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB). The analysis highlights that the BCG tends to become persistently negative after a pronounced credit boom deflates, implausibly indicating that credit should return to its cyclical peak. This poses questions about the usefulness of the BCG as a guide for macro-prudential policy setting over the full credit cycle.
The paper on measuring credit gap highlights that assessing when credit is excessive is important to understand macro-financial vulnerabilities and guide macro-prudential policy. The Basel Credit Gap (BCG)—the deviation of the credit-to-GDP ratio from its long-term trend estimated with a one-sided Hodrick-Prescott (HP) filter—is the indicator preferred by the Basel Committee because of its good performance as an early warning of banking crises. However, for a number of European countries, this indicator implausibly suggests that credit should go back to its level at the peak of the boom after the credit cycle turns, resulting in large negative gaps that might delay the activation of macro-prudential policies. The paper presents two different approaches—a multivariate filter based on economic theory and a fundamentals-based panel regression.
Each approach has pros and cons, but they both provide a useful complement to the BCG in assessing macro-financial vulnerabilities in Europe. The authors show that both methodologies yield credit gaps that turn positive ahead of crises (similar to the BCG) but, unlike the BCG, do not remain negative for an extended period following the burst of a large and prolonged credit boom. The study does not test the crisis early warning properties of these two measures because, as experience with the BCG indicates, focus on these properties may produce a measure that performs poorly in other phases of the credit cycle. Having an indicator that can produce a view of the position of the economy over the entire financial cycle may inform recommendations of broader macroeconomic policy, beyond the decision on the CCyB.
Related Link: Working Paper
Keywords: International, Europe, Banking, CCyB, Macro-Prudential Policy, Basel Credit Gap, Research, Credit Risk, BCBS, IMF
Previous ArticleDNB Issues Data Checks and Other Reporting Updates for Banks
The use cases of generative AI in the banking sector are evolving fast, with many institutions adopting the technology to enhance customer service and operational efficiency.
As part of the increasing regulatory focus on operational resilience, cyber risk stress testing is also becoming a crucial aspect of ensuring bank resilience in the face of cyber threats.
A few years down the road from the last global financial crisis, regulators are still issuing rules and monitoring banks to ensure that they comply with the regulations.
The European Commission (EC) recently issued an update informing that the European Council and the Parliament have endorsed the Banking Package implementing the final elements of Basel III standards
The Swiss Federal Council recently decided to further develop the Swiss Climate Scores, which it had first launched in June 2022.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) launched consultation on a Pillar 3 disclosure framework for climate-related financial risks, with the comment period ending on February 29, 2024.
The U.S. President Joe Biden signed an Executive Order, dated October 30, 2023, to ensure safe, secure, and trustworthy development and use of artificial intelligence (AI).
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) launched an integrated digital platform, Gprnt, also known as “Greenprint.”
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has published the final templates, and the associated guidance, for collecting climate-related data for the one-off Fit-for-55 climate risk scenario analysis.
The Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) published its latest set of long-term climate macro-financial scenarios (Phase IV) for assessing forward-looking climate risks.