Basel and Fed G-Sib methods pose dual test to US banks
Different emphasis of rival frameworks could frustrate bank efforts to reduce systemic risk
The two methodologies used by US regulators to gauge banks’ systemic threat weight their risks differently, complicating the ability of firms to reduce or cast off applicable capital add-ons, a Risk Quantum analysis shows.
US banks are subject to two methods of measuring their systemic riskiness: Method 1, based on the Basel Committee framework; and Method 2, drafted by the Federal Reserve. Both comprise five systemic indicator categories.
Under Method 1, of the aggregate end-2017 systemic
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Risk Quantum
G-Sib cross-border risk drops to four-year low
Two-thirds of systemic banks saw systemic indicator decrease in 2023
Thirteen EU banks face loan losses of more than 16% from green switch
Climate stress test predicts overall bank losses of 6%, rising to 11% under adverse scenarios
Deutsche misses G-Sib surcharge cut despite EU score benefit
Carve-out of intra-bloc exposure lowers score below 230bp, but 1.5% surcharge remains
Post-UBS takeover, Switzerland sees biggest regional G-Sib score spike
Credit Suisse acquisition pushes UBS’s complexity category to all-time high, driving up country’s overall score
Deutsche’s IRC tops €8 billion in four-year high
Ballooning credit-event risk charge contrasts with Q3 drop at BNP Paribas, ING
Fed’s stricter G-Sib scoring punishes BofA, Goldman
Duo’s method 2 capital requirements will diverge further from those entailed by Basel’s methodology
Italian funds snatch record €24bn debt securities in September
Mixed funds’ holdings jump by half as bond-only funds tick up 2%
Options expiry triggers $4bn liquidity shortfall at NSCC
Second-largest simulated shortfall on record mitigated by extra liquidity deposit and OCC commitment
