The concept of an economic downturn was designed to address potential adverse macroeconomic conditions within estimations of the Internal Ratings-Based (IRB) risk parameter models. The regulatory definition of a downturn was first introduced in the earliest Basel II regulation, however, there were no strict rules and no detailed guidance on how the downturn period should be identified, and how a downturn adjustment should be estimated. The whole regulatory and risk management community within the European Central Bank (ECB) regulated single market spent significant time developing and updating the downturn methodology of their respective financial institutions. In this blog article we will talk about the latest regulatory requirements on this topic and will discuss the impact of a downturn period on the main components of the LGD Model.
A well-functioning Loss Given Default (LGD) model is expected to be present with all Advanced IRB banks as required by the Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, later referred to as CRR and subsequently by a set of regulatory papers released by the EBA and ECB.
EBA Guidelines on the PD estimation, the LGD estimation and the treatment of defaulted exposures (EBA/GL/2017/16) further referred as “GL on PD&LGD estimation” distinguishes two steps in the development of the LGD framework:
- Model development in LGD estimation as per section 6.2 (which is commonly known as the Risk Differentiation Function)
- LGD calibration as per section 6.3
In this article, we will be focusing solemnly on the first step; thus, it will be mainly concerned with how to differentiate obligors/facilities in terms of their relative risk, measured in LGD. The second step (LGD calibration), we will address as a topic with a separate blog post.
Minimum capital ratios
The following blog post is part of the overview of supervisory measures in reaction to the Corona crisis:Supervisory measures in reaction to the Corona crisis – Overview.
According to the ad hoc measures taken by the ECB, banks can fully use their capital buffers during this time of financial distress, including the Capital Conservation Buffer (CCB) and the Pillar 2 Guidance (P2G). This means that banks are allowed to operate temporarily – until further notice – below the level of capital defined by the P2G and the CCB.
Besides, banks can partially use capital instruments that do not qualify as CET1 capital, e.g. Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments, to meet their Pillar 2 Requirement (P2R). This measure is effectively an early implementation of the standards laid down in CRD V that originally should entry into force in January 2021). Banks will therefore benefit from relief in the composition of capital for the P2R.
Closed factories and shops, cancelled events, travel bans, wide-ranging curfews – the Corona crisis turns out to have dangerous and sudden effects on the global economy. The dramatic meltdown of leading stock markets in recent weeks seems to reflect the fears of a long-lasting recession. For some people, this brings back bad memories of the financial crisis back in 2008. Although “this time is different” [credits to Reinhart/Rogoff], the financial sector is facing severe second-order effects, including:
- An unprecedented wave of distressed and defaulted clients leading to a sharp increase in loan loss provisions and thus serious P&L hits
- Deterioration and high volatility of prices for bonds and equities that serve, e.g. as liquid assets or collateral
Besides, banks themselves need to cope with multiple operational challenges resulting from the extensive shutdown, e.g. working from home as a trader within a highly regulated environment or managing ongoing on-site inspections and important implementation projects “remotely”.
Therefore, besides several short-term measures to support companies, employees and self-employed people, the governments and respective competent authorities also agreed on various temporary reliefs for banks to ensure that they “can continue to fulfil their role to fund households and corporations amid the coronavirus-related economic shock to the global economy” [ECB].
PwC is committed to to be side by side with our clients in these difficult times, in any way possible to support institutions deal with the many challenges they are facing. Part of this commitment includes informing our clients proactively and help to analyze the potential impact of this crisis and related measures. Through this Regulatory Blog, we will continuously provide you with updates on regulatory and supervisory measures and share our views on how these could affect banks. (this time only in English since we have a steadily growing number of international readers – thank you for your understanding!). Information in German on the impact on the German Banking & Capital Market are available here: Banken und Kapitalmärkte – Auswirkungen durch COVID-19
Please do not wait to contact us whenever you need our support – be it in understanding and analyzing the impact of the crisis and the potential measures or in coping with the operational challenges in these extraordinary times. And most important: Please stay healthy and take good care of you and your loved ones!
Die neue Partial Use-Philosophie des Baseler Ausschuss für Bankenaufsicht (BCBS) und der EBA könnte der erste Schritt zu einer Wiederbelebung des IRB-Ansatzes sein. Sowohl Institute, die den IRB-Ansatz zukünftig anwenden wollen, als auch Institute die den IRB-Ansatz bereits heute anwenden, werden von der größeren Flexibilität und Kostensenkungen profitieren.
The new partial use philosophy of the Basel Committee and the EBA could be the first step into a revival of the IRB approach. Both, institutions that want to use the IRB approach and banks using the IRB approach will profit from much more flexibility and cost reduction.