Upload
paul-bryant
View
215
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
www.fig-uk.com
The Regulatory Framework...A Change of Direction
Bucharest – 12th March 2014
Confidential
Paul Costea
2
The Basel Regulatory Framework is Undergoing a Fundamental Rethink
• The financial crisis has revealed major weaknesses in traditional approaches to risk management
• Performance and risk management reporting systems continue to rely on lagged risk measures that are dependent on quantitative models, risk indicators and self-assessments
• These techniques have failed bank management, regulators, investors and other stakeholders because they do not provide a basis on which exposures to risk can be quantified, aggregated and reported as they accumulate
• The Basel Committee and Financial Stability Board have conducted a number of studies of the regulatory framework and their conclusion is that it has become overly complex, its outputs are unreliable and lack comparability and there is a general inability to aggregate risk data
• For example...
3
Basel Committee – Balancing Risk Sensitivity, Simplicity and Comparability
“...the pursuit of increased risk sensitivity has considerably increased the complexity of the capital adequacy framework in some areas – particularly the calculation methodology for risk-weighted assets”
“...banks are likely to employ a large number (possibly hundreds) of models to determine their consolidated capital requirements which are, in turn, based on a very large number of inputs estimated using complex quantitative techniques”
“… these methods are intended to improve the accuracy of risk assessments, but clearly make the calculation process highly complex”
Basel Committee‘The Regulatory Framework: Balancing
Risk Sensitivity, Simplicity and Comparability’July 2013
4
“The quest for risk-sensitivity in the Basel framework, while sensible in principle, has generated problems in practice. It has spawned startling degrees of complexity and an over-reliance on probably unreliable models”
“With thousands of parameters calibrated from short samples, these models are unlikely to be robust for many decades, perhaps centuries to come. It is close to impossible to tell whether results from them are prudent”
Andrew G Haldane & Vasileios MadourosBank of England
”The Dog and the Frisbee”Speech given at the FRB of Kansas City’s 36th Economic Policy Symposium
August 31, 2012
A Central Banker’s View of Basel II and Risk Models
5
Basel Committee – Fundamental Review of the Trading Book
“...definition of the regulatory boundary has been a source of weakness... A key determinant of the boundary is banks’ intent to trade, an inherently subjective criterion that has proved difficult to police and insufficiently restrictive from a prudential perspective in some jurisdictions.”
“Weaknesses include: its (VaR’s) inability to adequately capture credit risk; its inability to capture market liquidity risk; the provision of incentives for banks to take on tail risk; and, in some circumstances, the inadequate capture of basis risk”
“...the large number and size of backtesting exceptions observed during the crisis serve to highlight regulatory concerns with continued reliance on VaR”
Basel CommitteeFundamental Review of the Trading Book
May 2012
6
The Regulatory Authorities in Basel are Challenging the Industry to Resolve the Issue
• Recent papers that signal a regulatory change of thinking and direction include:– Basel - Principles for effective risk data aggregation and risk reporting– Basel - The regulatory framework: balancing risk sensitivity, simplicity and
comparability– FSB - Principles for an effective risk appetite framework– FSB - Supervisory interaction with financial institutions on risk culture
7
Academics are Advocating an Accounting Solution... ‘Risk Accounting’
“Determining appropriate relative comparisons of systemic-risk exposure is the prime measurement issue in the short run. In the longer run… financial accounting needs fundamental revisions and a specialized new branch called 'risk accounting' must be created… Exposure or risk accounting is going to be adapted if we are to have effective external financial accounting and regulation. Current accounting practices are focused on valuation, which is inherently a static measure of financial conditions. Focused on exposures, risk accounting is inherently a dynamic measure of financial condition because it indicates how the individual balance-sheet values are likely to change in response to changes in the underlying financial-economic environment.”
Prof. Robert C. MertonHarvard Business School
Financial Innovation and the Management and Regulation of Financial Institutions
Journal of Banking and Finance, July 1995
8
Academics are Advocating an Accounting Solution... ‘Risk Accounting’
“The very fact that so many smart and experienced corporate leaders were all led astray suggests that the crisis can't be blamed on the mistakes of a few greedy CEOs. In my view, there's something fundamentally wrong with current corporate-governance structures and the language of corporate management. We just don't have the proper lexicon to have a meaningful discussion about the kinds of risks that typical corporations face today, and we need to create a new field of ‘risk accounting’ to address this gap in GAAP”
Prof. Andrew Lo MIT Sloane School of Management
quoted in ‘Understanding Our Blind Spots’ Wall Street Journal, March 2009
9
Academics in the UK Have Successfully Codified a System of Risk Accounting
• Risk accounting involves the tagging of risk information onto transactions that is used in a calculation of each transaction’s exposure to risk using a new standardised risk metric - the Risk Unit (RU) - that is then accounted for in a system of enterprise wide risk accounting and reporting
• This same principle is used in management accounting, i.e. transactions are tagged with management information (product, customer, cost centre, market segment codes etc) to drive enterprise wide management reporting
10
Risk Accounting – An Overview
Updated for changes or dynamically through automated interfaces, e.g. ‘People’ via HR system
Daily management dashboards
Risk Metrics
Products / Transactions
V a l u e T a b l eValue Factors Fixed
Inherent Risk Factors
CreditRisk Table
Market Risk Table
Liquidity Risk Table
Risk weight according to product characteristics
Risk Mitigation Factors
Sam
ple
Best
P
racti
ce
Scori
ng
Tem
pla
tes Credit
Assessment & ApprovalQuality
Assurance & MonitoringCredit Risk
Administration
Model Management
Buffer Management
Model Management
Internal Control Evaluation
People
Trading Account Reconciliations
Trading Limits & Controls
Model Management
Electronic Trading Systems
(HFT)
Liquidity Inherent Risk
(RUs)RMI
Residual Risk
Market Inherent Risk
(RUs)RMI
Residual Risk
Credit Inherent Risk (RUs)
RMIResidual Risk
Same inputs as for management accounting
Inputs
11
A Common Risk Measurement and Reporting Framework – Is This the Future?
• Risk reporting can then be built around 3 core metrics:– Inherent Risk (RUs) – maximum potential for loss– Risk Mitigation Index (RMI) – risk mitigation
effectiveness of the operating environment– Residual Risk (RUs) – inherent risk reduced by risk
mitigation effectiveness• The 3 core metrics need to be calculated for all
transactions approved for processing per the General Ledger grouped by product
• Accounting for risks of business units, customers, products etc. using the 3 core metrics results in ‘Risk Accounting’ as an extension of management accounting
• This has been the vision of academics and others for some years but finding a viable, replicable and mechanisable method of Risk Accounting has been the unsolved challenge
• Now it has been done!
12
More Information on Risk Accounting is Available via Free Downloads
On the BIS website:https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs258/unileeds.pdf
On the SSRN website:http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2165034