The European Union-wide banking stress test 2016 was conducted by the European Banking Authority (EBA) in order to assess the resilience of financial institutions in the European Union to a hypothetical adverse market scenario. The stress test was formally launched on 24 February 2016 with a publication of the final methodology and templates as well as the scenarios. [1] It covered over 70% of the national banking-industry assets in the euro area, each EU member state and Norway. [2] 53 EU banks participated in the exercise, 39 of which are directly supervised by the ECB under European Banking Supervision. The outcomes of the exercise, including banks' individual results, were published on 29 July 2016, at 22:00 CET. [3]
The European Banking Authority (EBA) aims to ensure the proper functioning of financial markets and the stability of the financial system in the EU. To this end, the EBA has the right to conduct the EU-wide stress tests, in cooperation with the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB). Such exercises are designed to test the resilience of financial institutions to adverse market developments.
The stress tests are performed in cooperation with the ESRB, the European Central Bank (ECB), national competent authorities and the European Commission. In particular, the EBA was responsible for the common methodology and disclosure of the results. The ESRB and the European Commission designed the underlying macroeconomic scenarios. The quality assurance process of banks’ results was led by the ECB and national competent authorities. Moreover, the ECB conducted the Asset Quality Review that served as a starting point of the stress test.
Banks needed to assess the impact of a macroeconomic baseline and adverse scenario. The scenarios each covered a period of three years (2015-2018). The macroeconomic adverse scenario and any risk type specific shocks linked to the scenario are developed by the ESRB and the ECB in close cooperation with competent authorities, the EBA and the European Commission. The latter will also provide the macroeconomic baseline scenario. [4]
Risk types considered in the stress test included credit risk including securitisations, market risk and counterparty credit risk, operational risk including conduct risk. In addition, banks are requested to project the effect of the scenarios on net interest income and to stress P&L and capital items not covered by other risk types. The 2016 exercise adds an explicit treatment of conduct risk and FX lending to its scope. [5]
The stress test relied on a static balance sheet assumption as of 31 December 2015, implying no new growth and a constant business mix and model over the whole time horizon.methodology [5]
The exercise is run at the highest level of consolidation. The scope of consolidation is the perimeter of the banking group as defined by the CRR/CRD IV (i.e. the implementation of Basel III in the EU). Insurance activities are therefore excluded both from the balance sheet and the revenues and costs side of the P&L. [5]
As opposed to the 2014 stress test, no single capital threshold is defined for this exercise as banks will be assessed against relevant supervisory capital ratios under a static balance sheet and the results will inform the 2016 round of Supervisory Review and Evaluation Processes (SREP) under which decisions are made on appropriate capital resources and forward looking capital plans are challenged. No hurdle rates or capital thresholds are defined for the purpose of the exercise. However, competent authorities will apply stress test results as an input to the supervisory review and evaluation process. [5]
No bank will be said to have failed because the test won't judge banks against a single capital threshold as in previous exercises. [2]
The outcomes of the exercise, including banks' individual results, was published on 29 July 2016. [3] An expedited publication is designed to align the finalisation of the exercise with the cycle of the annual supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP), as this will ensure the results of the stress test are incorporated as an input to that process. DZ Bank was excluded from the test due to the ongoing merger with WGZ Bank, as well as National Bank of Greece was already covered in 2015 Comprehensive Assessment of European Central Bank.
The following table lists the 52 banks that undergone the stress test:
Fully loaded CET1 capital ratio | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bank | Country | Starting 2015 | Baseline 2018 | Adverse 2018 | Delta Adverse 2018 |
Erste Group Bank AG | Austria | 12.25% | 13.55% | 8.02% | ‐423 |
Raiffeisen‐Landesbanken‐Holding GmbH | Austria | 10.20% | 12.33% | 6.12% | ‐408 |
KBC Group NV | Belgium | 14.65% | 17.60% | 11.41% | ‐323 |
Belfius Banque SA | Belgium | 14.88% | 16.18% | 11.27% | ‐361 |
Deutsche Bank AG | Germany | 11.99% | 12.41% | 8.34% | ‐365 |
Commerzbank AG | Germany | 12.13% | 13.13% | 7.42% | ‐471 |
Landesbank Baden‐Württemberg | Germany | 13.50% | 14.17% | 9.53% | ‐397 |
Bayerische Landesbank | Germany | 11.11% | 12.08% | 7.80% | ‐332 |
Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale | Germany | 15.98% | 15.58% | 9.40% | ‐658 |
Landesbank Hessen‐Thüringen Girozentrale | Germany | 13.11% | 14.42% | 10.10% | ‐301 |
NRW.BANK | Germany | 12.09% | 13.16% | 8.62% | ‐347 |
Volkswagen Financial Services AG | Germany | 42.54% | 39.44% | 35.40% | ‐714 |
DekaBank Deutsche Girozentrale | Germany | 11.67% | 12.90% | 9.55% | ‐211 |
Danske Bank | Denmark | 15.48% | 17.66% | 14.02% | ‐147 |
Nykredit Realkredit | Denmark | 16.00% | 19.84% | 13.99% | ‐201 |
Jyske Bank | Denmark | 19.19% | 22.03% | 13.86% | ‐533 |
Banco Santander S.A. | Spain | 10.27% | 12.03% | 8.19% | ‐208 |
Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria S.A. | Spain | 11.72% | 12.81% | 8.04% | ‐369 |
Criteria Caixa Holding | Spain | 10.20% | 13.45% | 6.62% | ‐358 |
BFA Tenedora de Acciones S.A | Spain | 10.19% | 13.17% | 8.20% | ‐199 |
Banco Popular Español S.A. | Spain | 13.74% | 14.42% | 9.58% | ‐417 |
Banco de Sabadell S.A. | Spain | 9.65% | 10.97% | 7.81% | ‐184 |
OP‐Pohjola osk | Finland | 19.16% | 20.92% | 14.61% | ‐455 |
BNP Paribas | France | 10.87% | 12.09% | 8.51% | ‐236 |
Crédit Agricole Group | France | 12.78% | 14.36% | 9.47% | ‐331 |
Société Générale | France | 15.55% | 16.62% | 13.38% | ‐216 |
BPCE | France | 13.68% | 14.81% | 10.49% | ‐319 |
Confédération Nationale du Crédit Mutuel | France | 14.51% | 14.95% | 9.82% | ‐470 |
La Banque Postale | France | 10.91% | 11.61% | 7.50% | ‐341 |
OTP Bank Nyrt. | Hungary | 12.94% | 14.56% | 9.22% | ‐372 |
The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland | Ireland | 13.11% | 13.90% | 4.31% | ‐880 |
Allied Irish Banks plc | Ireland | 11.28% | 15.03% | 6.15% | ‐513 |
UniCredit S.p.A. | Italy | ||||
Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A. | Italy | 12.39% | 14.61% | 9.00% | ‐339 |
Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena S.p.A. | Italy | ||||
Banco Popolare S.C. | Italy | 10.38% | 11.47% | 7.10% | ‐329 |
Unione di Banche Italiane S.p.A. | Italy | 11.62% | 13.01% | 8.85% | ‐277 |
ING Groep N.V. | The Netherlands | 15.44% | 16.20% | 9.53% | ‐591 |
Coöperatieve Centrale Raiffeisen‐Boerenleenbank B.A. (RABO) | The Netherlands | 11.97% | 13.33% | 8.10% | ‐387 |
ABN AMRO Group N.V. | The Netherlands | 12.70% | 12.50% | 8.98% | ‐371 |
N.V. Bank Nederlandse Gemeenten | The Netherlands | 26.17% | 28.05% | 17.62% | ‐855 |
DNB Bank Group | Norway | 14.31% | 16.56% | 14.30% | ‐1 |
Powszechna Kasa Oszczednosci Bank Polski SA | Poland | 13.42% | 14.73% | 11.44% | ‐198 |
Nordea Bank (group) | Sweden | 16.45% | 18.60% | 14.09% | ‐236 |
Svenska Handelsbanken (group) | Sweden | 18.85% | 21.55% | 16.60% | ‐225 |
Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken (group) | Sweden | 21.25% | 23.09% | 18.55% | ‐270 |
Swedbank (group) | Sweden | 25.08% | 27.47% | 23.05% | ‐203 |
HSBC Holdings plc | United Kingdom | 11.35% | 12.48% | 7.30% | ‐405 |
Barclays Plc | United Kingdom | 11.87% | 12.41% | 8.76% | ‐312 |
The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc | United Kingdom | 13.05% | 16.44% | 10.14% | ‐291 |
Lloyds Banking Group Plc | United Kingdom | 15.53% | 15.89% | 8.08% | ‐745 |
Valuation risk is the risk that an entity suffers a loss when trading an asset or a liability due to a difference between the accounting value and the price effectively obtained in the trade.
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) is a European Union financial regulatory agency. It was established in 2011 under EU Regulation 1094/2010.
The Supervisory Capital Assessment Program, publicly described as the bank stress tests, was an assessment of capital conducted by the Federal Reserve System and thrift supervisors to determine if the largest U.S. financial organizations had sufficient capital buffers to withstand the recession and the financial market turmoil. The test used two macroeconomic scenarios, one based on baseline conditions and the other with more pessimistic expectations, to plot a 'What If?' exploration into the banking situation in the rest of 2009 and into 2010. The capital levels at 19 institutions were assessed based on their Tier 1 common capital, although it was originally thought that regulators would use tangible common equity as the yardstick. The results of the tests were released on May 7, 2009, at 5pm EST.
In finance, a stress test is an analysis or simulation designed to determine the ability of a given financial instrument or financial institution to deal with an economic crisis. Instead of doing financial projection on a "best estimate" basis, a company or its regulators may do stress testing where they look at how robust a financial instrument is in certain crashes, a form of scenario analysis. They may test the instrument under, for example, the following stresses:
The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) was an independent advisory group on banking supervision in the European Union (EU), active from its establishment in 2004 to its replacement on 1 January 2011 by the European Banking Authority (EBA) which took over all its tasks and responsibilities following Regulation (EC) No. 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010.
Macroprudential regulation is the approach to financial regulation that aims to mitigate risk to the financial system as a whole. In the aftermath of the late-2000s financial crisis, there is a growing consensus among policymakers and economic researchers about the need to re-orient the regulatory framework towards a macroprudential perspective.
Basel III is the third Basel Accord, a framework that sets international standards for bank capital adequacy, stress testing, and liquidity requirements. Augmenting and superseding parts of the Basel II standards, it was developed in response to the deficiencies in financial regulation revealed by the financial crisis of 2007–08. It is intended to strengthen bank capital requirements by increasing minimum capital requirements, holdings of high quality liquid assets, and decreasing bank leverage.
The European System of Financial Supervision (ESFS) is the framework for financial supervision in the European Union that has been in operation since 2011. The system consists of the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs), the European Systemic Risk Board, the Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities, and the national supervisory authorities of EU member states. It was proposed by the European Commission in 2009 in response to the financial crisis of 2007–08.
The European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) is a group established on 16 December 2010 in response to the financial crisis. It is tasked with the macro-prudential oversight of the financial system within the European Union in order to contribute to the prevention or mitigation of systemic risks to financial stability in the EU. It shall contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market and thereby ensure a sustainable contribution of the financial sector to economic growth.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is a regulatory agency of the European Union headquartered in La Défense, Île-de-France. Its activities include conducting stress tests on European banks to increase transparency in the European financial system and identifying weaknesses in banks' capital structures.
A European Union-wide banking stress test exercise has been conducted by the Committee of European Banking Supervisors every year since 2009. The second instance was performed in July 2010. The Council of the European Union mandated that Committee so to do, in the aftermath of the global financial crisis which started in 2007.
Andrea Enria an Italian economist who served as Chair of the ECB Supervisory Board from 2019 to 2023. He previously served as the chairperson of the European Banking Authority (EBA) between 2011 and 2019.
European Banking Supervision, also known as the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), is the policy framework for the prudential supervision of banks in the euro area. It is centered on the European Central Bank (ECB), whose supervisory arm is referred to as ECB Banking Supervision. EU member states outside of the euro area can also participate on a voluntary basis, as was the case of Bulgaria as of late 2023. European Banking Supervision was established by Regulation 1024/2013 of the Council, also known as the SSM Regulation, which also created its central decision-making body, the ECB Supervisory Board.
A European Union-wide banking stress test has been conducted by the Committee of European Banking Supervisors every year since 2009. The second instance was performed in July 2010. This third round was carried out with results published in July 2011. The Council of the European Union mandated that Committee so to do, in the aftermath of the global financial crisis which started in 2007.
The banking union refers to the transfer of responsibility for banking policy from the member state-level to the union-wide level in several EU member states, initiated in 2012 as a response to the 2009 Eurozone crisis. The motivation for the banking union was the fragility of numerous banks in the Eurozone, and the identification of a vicious circle between credit conditions for these banks and the sovereign credit of their respective home countries. In several countries, private debts arising from a property bubble were transferred to the respective sovereign as a result of banking system bailouts and government responses to slowing economies post-bubble. Conversely, weakness in sovereign credit resulted in deterioration of the balance sheet position of the banking sector, not least because of high domestic sovereign exposures of the banks.
The European Union-wide banking stress test 2014 was conducted by the European Banking Authority in order to assess the resilience of financial institutions in the European Union to a hypothetical adverse market scenario. In total, 123 major EU banks participated in the exercise. 24 banks failed the test with an overall capital shortfall of EUR 24.2 billion under the adverse scenario.
Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) is a United States regulatory framework introduced by the Federal Reserve in 2009 to assess, regulate, and supervise large banks and financial institutions – collectively referred to in the framework as bank holding companies (BHCs). It was an extension of the stress tests performed during the financial crisis of 2007–2008.
Helmut Ettl is an Austrian economist and European banking and finance specialist.