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
ESAs (EBA, EIOPA, and ESMA) published the first joint report that assesses risks in the financial sector since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
ECB published a decision allowing the euro area banks under its direct supervision to exclude certain central bank exposures from the leverage ratio.
ESAs launched a survey seeking feedback on the presentational aspects of product templates under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR or Regulation 2019/2088).
ECB published input of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) into the EBA feasibility report on reducing the reporting burden for banks in EU.
EBA has decided to phase out the guidelines on legislative and non-legislative moratoria of loan repayments, in accordance with the earlier specified end of September deadline.
EC adopted a decision determining, for a limited period of time, that the regulatory framework applicable to central counterparties, or CCPs, in the UK and Northern Ireland is equivalent to the requirements laid down in the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR or Regulation 648/2012).
EBA published an Opinion addressed to EC to raise awareness about the opportunity to clarify certain issues related to the definition of credit institution in the upcoming review of the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation (CRD and CRR).
ECB finalized the guide on assessment methodology for the internal model method for calculating exposure to counterparty credit risk (CCR) and the advanced method for own funds requirements for credit valuation adjustment (A-CVA) risk.
FED is proposing to temporarily revise the capital assessments and stress testing reports (FR Y-14A/Q/M) to implement the changes necessary to conduct stressed analysis in connection with the re-submission of capital plans, using data as of June 30, 2020.
FED adopted a proposal to extend for three years, with revision, the information collection under the market risk capital rule (FR 4201; OMB No. 7100-0314).