Stress test (financial)

Last updated

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:

Contents

This type of analysis has become increasingly widespread, and has been taken up by various governmental bodies (such as the PRA in the UK or inter-governmental bodies such as the European Banking Authority (EBA) and the International Monetary Fund) as a regulatory requirement on certain financial institutions to ensure adequate capital allocation levels to cover potential losses incurred during extreme, but plausible, events. The EBA's regulatory stress tests have been referred to as "a walk in the park" by Saxo Bank's Chief Economist. [1] This emphasis on adequate, risk adjusted determination of capital has been further enhanced by modifications to banking regulations such as Basel II. Stress testing models typically allow not only the testing of individual stressors, but also combinations of different events. There is also usually the ability to test the current exposure to a known historical scenario (such as the Russian debt default in 1998 or 9/11 attacks) to ensure the liquidity of the institution. In 2014, 25 banks failed in a stress test conducted by EBA.

Bank stress test

A bank stress test is a simulation based on an examination of the balance sheet of that institution. [2] Large international banks began using internal stress tests in the early 1990s. [3] : 19  In 1996, the Basel Capital Accord was amended to require banks and investment firms to conduct stress tests to determine their ability to respond to market events. [3] : 19  However, up until 2007, stress tests were typically performed only by the banks themselves, for internal self-assessment. [3] : 1 

Beginning in 2007, governmental regulatory bodies became interested in conducting their own stress tests to insure the effective operation of financial institutions. [3] : 1  Since then, stress tests have been routinely performed by financial regulators in different countries or regions, to ensure that the banks under their authority are engaging in practices likely to avoid negative outcomes. In India, legislation was enacted in 2007 requiring banks to undergo regular stress tests. [4] In October 2012, U.S. regulators unveiled new rules expanding this practice by requiring the largest American banks to undergo stress tests twice per year, once internally and once conducted by the regulators. [5] Starting in 2014 midsized firms (i.e., those with $10–50 billion in assets) are also being required to conduct Dodd-Frank Act Stress Testing. [6] In 2012, federal regulators also began recommending portfolio stress testing as a sound risk management practice for community banks or institutions that were too small to fall under Dodd-Frank's requirements. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) in an October 18, 2012, Bulletin recommends stress testing as a means to identify and quantify loan portfolio risk. [7] The FDIC made similar recommendations for community banks. [8]

Since the initial Dodd-Frank Act Stress Testing began the Federal Reserve has found that post-stress capital has increased. Furthermore, the Federal Reserve has continued to advance their expectations and adopt more complex scenarios in bank stress testing. [9]

Statistician and risk analyst Nassim Taleb has advocated a different approach to stress testing saying that stress tests based on arbitrary numbers can be gamed. A more effective test is to assess the fragility of a bank by applying one stress test and scaling it up, which provides an indicator of how sensitive a bank is to changes in economic conditions. [10] [11]

Payment and settlement systems stress test

Another form of financial stress testing is the stress testing of financial market infrastructure. As part of Central Banks' market infrastructure oversight functions, stress tests have been applied to payment and securities settlement systems. [12] [13] [14] Since ultimately, the Banks need to meet their obligations in Central Bank money held in payment systems that are commonly operated or closely supervised by central banks [15] (e.g. CHAPS, FedWire, Target2, which are also referred to as large value payment systems), it is of great interest to monitor these systems' participants' (mainly banks) liquidity positions.

The amount of liquidity held by banks on their accounts can be a lot less (and usually is) than the total value of transferred payments during a day. The total amount of liquidity needed by banks to settle a given set of payments is dependent on the balancedness of the circulation of money from account to account (reciprocity of payments), the timing of payments and the netting procedures used. [16] The inability of some participants to send payments can cause severe falls in settlement ratios of payments. The failure of one participant to send payments can have negative contagion effects on other participants' liquidity positions and their potential to send payments.

By using stress tests it is possible to evaluate the short term effects of events such as bank failures or technical communication breakdowns that lead to the inability of chosen participants to send payments. These effects can be viewed as direct effects on the participant, but also as systemic contagion effects. How hard the other participants will be hit by a chosen failure scenario will be dependent on the available collateral and initial liquidity of participants, and their potential to bring in more liquidity. [17] Stress test conducted on payment systems help to evaluate the short term adequacy and sufficiency of the prevailing liquidity levels and buffers of banks, and the contingency measures of the studied payment systems. [17]

A financial stress test is only as good as the scenarios on which it is based. [18] Those designing stress tests must literally imagine possible futures that the financial system might face. As an exercise of the imagination, the stress test is limited by the imaginative capacities of those designing the stress test scenarios. Sometimes, the stress test's designers fail to imagine plausible future scenarios, possibly because of professional peer pressure or groupthink within a profession or trade or because some things are just too horrible to imagine. For example, there was a failure by the great majority of financial experts to envisage the 2007–2008 financial crisis. The successive financial stress tests conducted by the European Banking Authority and the Committee of European Banking Supervisors in 2009, 2010 and 2011 illustrate this dynamic. The 2009 and 2010 stress tests assumed even in their adverse scenarios a relatively benign macro-economic environment of -0.6% economic growth in the Euro area; by 2011 it was clear that such assumptions were no longer just plausible, they were almost certain to happen; the adverse scenario had to be adjusted to a -4.0% growth scenario. Those reviewing and using the results of stress tests must cast a critical eye on the scenarios used in the stress test.

See also

Related Research Articles

Basel II is the second of the Basel Accords, which are recommendations on banking laws and regulations issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. It is now extended and partially superseded by Basel III.

Financial risk management is the practice of protecting economic value in a firm by managing exposure to financial risk - principally operational risk, credit risk and market risk, with more specific variants as listed aside. As for risk management more generally, financial risk management requires identifying the sources of risk, measuring these, and crafting plans to mitigate them. See Finance § Risk management for an overview.

A non-banking financial institution (NBFI) or non-bank financial company (NBFC) is a financial institution that is not legally a bank; it does not have a full banking license or is not supervised by a national or international banking regulatory agency. NBFC facilitate bank-related financial services, such as investment, risk pooling, contractual savings, and market brokering. Examples of these include hedge funds, insurance firms, pawn shops, cashier's check issuers, check cashing locations, payday lending, currency exchanges, and microloan organizations. Alan Greenspan has identified the role of NBFIs in strengthening an economy, as they provide "multiple alternatives to transform an economy's savings into capital investment which act as backup facilities should the primary form of intermediation fail."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bank</span> Financial institution which accepts deposits

A bank is a financial institution that accepts deposits from the public and creates a demand deposit while simultaneously making loans. Lending activities can be directly performed by the bank or indirectly through capital markets.

Regulatory responses to the subprime crisis addresses various actions taken by governments around the world to address the effects of the subprime mortgage crisis.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Volcker Rule</span> American investment banking rule

The Volcker Rule is section 619 of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The rule was originally proposed by American economist and former United States Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker in 2010 to restrict United States banks from making certain kinds of speculative investments that do not benefit their customers. It was not implemented until July 2015. Volcker argued that such speculative activity played a key role in the 2007–2008 financial crisis. The rule is often referred to as a ban on proprietary trading by commercial banks, whereby deposits are used to trade on the bank's own accounts, although a number of exceptions to this ban were included in the Dodd–Frank law.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Banking Authority</span> Agency of the European Union

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 systemically important financial institution (SIFI) is a bank, insurance company, or other financial institution whose failure might trigger a financial crisis. They are colloquially referred to as "too big to fail".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Banking Supervision</span> Supranational banking supervisory framework

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Swaps Regulatory Improvement Act</span>

The Swaps Regulatory Improvement Act is a bill that would amend the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The Swaps Regulatory Improvement Act would improve the ability of banks to use swaps as a tool for hedging risk. If Dodd-Frank is not amended, non-bank institutions will have to do many of the swap trades instead. H.R. 992 passed the House during the 113th United States Congress.

In financial services, open banking allows for financial data to be shared between banks and third-party service providers through the use of application programming interfaces (APIs). Traditionally, banks have kept customer financial data within their own closed systems. Open banking allows customers to share their financial information securely and electronically with other banks or other authorized financial organizations such as payment providers, lenders and insurance companies.

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.

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. It covered over 70% of the national banking-industry assets in the euro area, each EU member state and Norway. 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.

Liquidity regulations are financial regulations designed to ensure that financial institutions have the necessary assets on hand in order to prevent liquidity disruptions due to changing market conditions. This is often related to reserve requirement and capital requirement but focuses on the specific liquidity risk of assets that are held.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act</span> United States Law

The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act was signed into law by President Donald Trump on May 24, 2018. The bill eased financial regulations imposed by Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act after the financial crisis of 2007–2008.

References

  1. ↑ Cosgrave, Jenny (Oct 27, 2014). "Central bankers back stress tests as criticism swirls". CNBC. Retrieved March 5, 2015.
  2. ↑ Catey Hill, Your bank failed the stress test. Now what?, New York Daily News (July 2, 2010).
  3. 1 2 3 4 Mario Quagliariello, Stress-testing the Banking System: Methodologies and Applications (2009), p. 1.
  4. ↑ M. Y. Khan, Indian Financial Systems, Sixth Edition (2009), 13.45.
  5. ↑ Victoria McGrane, "New Rules Expand Bank 'Stress-Test' Process", The Wall Street Journal (October 9, 2012).
  6. ↑ "Stress testing: First at bat for midsized firms" (PDF). pwc.com/us/en/financial-services/regulatory-services/publications/dodd-frank-act-banks-stress-test-dfast.jhtml. PwC Financial Services Regulatory Practice, February, 2014.
  7. ↑ Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, "", OCC BULLETIN 2012-33: Community Bank Stress Testing (October 18, 2012).
  8. ↑ Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, "[www.fdic.gov/regulations/examinations/supervisory/insights/sisum12/SIsmr2012.pdf]", Supervisory Insights (Summer 2012).
  9. ↑ "First take: Ten key points form the Federal Reserve's 2015 Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test (DFAST)" (PDF). pwc.com/us/en/financial-services/regulatory-services/publications/dodd-frank-act-stress-test-2015.jhtml. PwC Financial Services Regulatory Practice, March, 2015.
  10. ↑ "One Bank Flagship Seminar by Nassim Nicholas Taleb - Tail Risk Measurement Heuristics". Bank of England, February, 2016.
  11. ↑ "A New Heuristic Measure of Fragility and Tail Risks: Application to Stress Testing" (PDF). International Monetary Fund, August, 2012.
  12. ↑ Humphrey, D. (1986). Payments finality and the risks of settlement failure. In A. Saunders and L.J. White (Ed.), Technology and the Regulation of Financial Markets: Securities, Futures and Banking (pp. 97-120). Heath, Lexington. MA.
  13. ↑ H. Leinonen (ed.): Simulation analyses and stress testing of payment networks (Bank of Finland Studies E:42/2009) Simulation publications
  14. ↑ H. Leinonen (ed.): Liquidity, risks and speed in payment and settlement systems - a simulation approach (Bank of Finland Studies E:31/2005) Simulation publications
  15. ↑ CPSS Publications No 34 (2001): CORE PRINCIPLES FOR SYSTEMICALLY IMPORTANT PAYMENT SYSTEMS
  16. ↑ CPSS Publications (1990): Report of the Committee on Interbank Netting Schemes of the Central Banks of the Group of Ten countries
  17. 1 2 ECB: EU Banks' Liquidity Stress testing and contingency funding plans 2008
  18. ↑ "Scenario Analysis in Risk Management", Bertrand Hassani, Published by Springer, 2016, ISBN   978-3-319-25056-4,
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.