Question about Bionic Turtle's 2009 FRM Program
07 Jan 2009
Learn Finance with the pros. Better articles, resources and screencasts for easier learning.
FRM |
Here is a possible distribution of credit portfolio losses. It skews due to limited upside (best result no defaults but there is limited upside on a credit portfolio), a statistically likely concentration of a few defaults, and the remote possibility of steep losses (high frequency of defaults to devastating effect):
A credit portfolio expects defaults. Expected loss (EL) is the cost of doing business (making loans). Basel II therefore assumes EL will be covered by loan loss provisions. Similar to companies that make provisions for a percentage of receivables that will not be collected, a bank creates provisions (contra-asset accounts) for anticipated defaults. The provision is the accounting entry. When a write-off actually occurs, it is charged against the provision.
Of course, these expected losses are reflected in the interest rates they charge (i.e., higher margins).
To remind where we are, this now refers to either the Foundation or Advanced internal-ratings based (IRB) approach to estimating credit risk under Basel II.
Basel II wants bank capital to cover the entire amount (distance) from the origin above to the value-at-risk (VaR). In other words, they want banks to have a cushion against EL + UL = VaR. So, there is a test for coverage of the EL with reserves. If the bank is "whole" on coverage of the EL, then the Basel capital charge "fills the VaR gap:" it charges for unexpected loss (UL) segment.
But Basel wants to be conservative about the estimate. So, the average loss given default (LGD) is transformed into a downturn LGD, which is an LGD that:
"reflects economic-downturn conditions in circumstances where loss severities are expected to be higher during cyclical downturns than during typical business conditions."
Here are the requirements:
07 Jan 2009
05 Jan 2009
04 Jan 2009
Comments
Be the first to leave a comment!
Leave a Comment