DOCSLIB.ORG

Risk-Weighted Assets and the Capital Requirement Per the Original Basel I Guidelines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Risk-Weighted Assets and the Capital Requirement Per the Original Basel I Guidelines P2.T7. Operational & Integrated Risk Management John Hull, Risk Management and Financial Institutions Basel I, II, and Solvency II Bionic Turtle FRM Video Tutorials By David Harper, CFA FRM Basel I, II, and Solvency II • Explain the motivations for introducing the Basel regulations, including key risk exposures addressed and explain the reasons for revisions to Basel regulations over time. • Explain the calculation of risk-weighted assets and the capital requirement per the original Basel I guidelines. • Describe and contrast the major elements—including a description of the risks covered—of the two options available for the calculation of market risk: Standardized Measurement Method & Internal Models Approach • Calculate VaR and the capital charge using the internal models approach, and explain the guidelines for backtesting VaR. • Describe and contrast the major elements of the three options available for the calculation of credit risk: Standardized Approach, Foundation IRB Approach & Advanced IRB Approach - Continued on next slide - Page 2 Basel I, II, and Solvency II • Describe and contract the major elements of the three options available for the calculation of operational risk: basic indicator approach, standardized approach, and the Advanced Measurement Approach. • Describe the key elements of the three pillars of Basel II: minimum capital requirements, supervisory review, and market discipline. • Define in the context of Basel II and calculate where appropriate: Probability of default (PD), Loss given default (LGD), Exposure at default (EAD) & Worst- case probability of default • Differentiate between solvency capital requirements (SCR) and minimum capital requirements (MCR) in the Solvency II framework, and describe the repercussions to an insurance company for breaching the SCR and MCR. • Compare the standardized approach and the internal models approach for calculating the SCR in Solvency II. Page 3 Explain the motivations for introducing the Basel regulations, including key risk exposures addressed and explain the reasons for revisions to Basel regulations over time. The primary motivation for bank regulation is to ensure that a bank holds enough capital for the risks it assumes. It is impossible to eliminate the possibility of a bank failure, but governments want to maximize confidence in the banking system by minimizing the default probability of banks. Deposit Insurance: Governments provide deposit insurance programs to protect depositors. Without deposit insurance, banks who take excessive risks relative to their capital base would find it difficult to attract deposits. Governments do not want to create a deposit insurance program that results in banks taking more risks. So, deposit insurance is accompanied by regulation concerned with capital requirements. Page 4 Explain the motivations for introducing the Basel regulations, including key risk exposures addressed and explain the reasons for revisions to Basel regulations over time (continued) Systemic risk is the risk that a failure by a large bank will lead to failures by other large banks and a collapse of the financial system. When a bank or other large financial institution experiences financial difficulties, governments have a dilemma. • If they allow the institution to fail, they create a systemic risk • But if they “bail out” the institution, they March 2008: Fed begins bailouts engender moral hazard Sep 2008: Lehman Brothers During the 2007-08 crisis, many large financial institutions were bailed out, rather than being allowed to fail, because governments were concerned about systemic risk. But the U.S. government allowed Lehman Brothers to fail in September 2008 to make it clear to the market that bailouts for large financial institutions were not automatic. Hull notes this decision to let Lehman Brothers fail arguably made the credit crisis worse. Page 5 Explain the motivations for introducing the Basel regulations, including key risk exposures addressed and explain the reasons for revisions to Basel regulations over time (continued) The Basel Committee formed in 1974 met regularly in Basel, Switzerland, under the patronage of the Bank for International Settlements. The first major result of these meetings was a document titled “International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards”, and referred to as the 1988 BIS Accord; aka, “Basel I.” Before the formation of Basel I guidelines, banks maintained a pre-set minimum ratio of capital to their total assets, but there was lack of standardization in defining the capital as well as the banks’ assets. Each country had its own definitions for deriving the capital-assets ratio which gave undue advantages to the banks belonging to the countries with liberal guidelines on the ratio. The situation worsened with the increase in international exposure of the banks. Page 6 Explain the motivations for introducing the Basel regulations, including key risk exposures addressed and explain the reasons for revisions to Basel regulations over time (continued) Huge exposures created by loans from international banks to less developed countries (LDCs), and the accounting games used to cover those exposures including debt rescheduling raised questions about the adequacy of capital levels. • Banks started booking various unregulated (over-the-counter) derivative deals such as interest rate swaps, currency swaps, and foreign exchange options giving rise to complexity in bank transactions and exposing them to substantial credit risk. • Banks started booking over-the-counter derivatives as “off-balance sheet” transactions which lessened the pressure on banks’ balance sheet as the assets in their balance sheet remained unaffected due to the derivative contracts. As a result, banks required to keep lesser capital vis-à-vis their assets while ignoring the off-balance sheet transactions. Page 7 Explain the motivations for introducing the Basel regulations, including key risk exposures addressed and explain the reasons for revisions to Basel regulations over time (continued) In June 1999, the Basel Committee proposed new rules that have become known as Basel II which were revised in January 2001 and April 2003. A final set of rules agreed to by all members of the Basel Committee was published in June 2004. This was updated in November 2005. Implementation of the rules began in 2007 after a Quantitative Impact Studies (QIS). Page 8 Explain the calculation of risk-weighted assets and the capital requirement per the original Basel I guidelines. The Basel I Accord This accord was the first outcome of the efforts of Basel committee to design uniform banking risk management standards to ensure capital adequacy in banks. The accord was readily accepted for implementation by all 12 members. The accord put forth 2 mandatory conditions that banks had to necessarily fulfill: • Banks to keep capital equal to at least 8.0% of the risk-weighted assets. • Cooke Ratio as a primary regulatory requirement. Page 9 Explain the calculation of risk-weighted assets and the capital requirement per the original Basel I guidelines (continued) Cooke Ratio (= 8.0%) The Cooke ratio was used to compute minimum capital that a bank was required to keep vis-à-vis the risk associated to its on and off-balance sheet assets called risk- weighted assets (RWA), a measure of the bank’s total credit exposure. Let us understand the derivation of risk-weighted assets of a bank in detail on the next slide. Page 10 Explain the calculation of risk-weighted assets and the capital requirement per the original Basel I guidelines (continued) Risk Weighted Assets for On-Balance Sheet Items In Basel I accord, for each type of on-balance sheet asset, a specific risk-weight was assigned signifying the risk associated with the asset type. The table below shows a snapshot of such assignment from the accord: Risk Weights for On-Balance-Sheet Items Risk Weight (%) Asset Category 0 Cash, gold bullion, claims on OECD governments such as Treasury bonds or insured residential mortgages 20 Claims on (loans to) OECD banks and OECD public sector entities such as securities issued by U.S. government agencies or claims on municipalities 50 Uninsured residential mortgage loans 100 All other claims such as corporate bonds and less- developed country debt, claims on non-OECD banks Page 11 Explain the calculation of risk-weighted assets and the capital requirement per the original Basel I guidelines (continued) The total risk weight for a bank’s on-balance sheet assets portfolio is simply the sum of risk-weighted assets, as shown in the formula below: Total on-balance sheet RWA = ∑ th where is the principal amount of the item and is the corresponding risk weight. Example: The assets of a bank consist of $100.0 million of corporate loans, $10.0 million of OECD government bonds, and $50.0 million of residential mortgages. Compute the total risk-weighted assets. Total RWA = 100% x 100 + 0% x 10 + 50% x 50 = 125 or $125 million. Page 12 Explain the calculation of risk-weighted assets and the capital requirement per the original Basel I guidelines (continued) Risk Weighted Assets for Off-balance Sheet Items The off-balance sheet items include bankers’ acceptances, guarantees, and loan commitments. For deriving RWA they are converted into their credit equivalent amount. Conversion into credit equivalent amount leads to derivation of a loan principal amount having same credit risk. For non-derivative items such as trade financing products, note issuance facilities etc., a specific
Load more

Recommended publications
  • International Regulation and Treatment of Trade Finance: What Are the Issues?
    Staff Working Paper ERSD-2010-09 February 2010 World Trade Organization Economic Research and Statistics Division INTERNATIONAL REGULATION AND TREATMENT OF TRADE FINANCE: WHAT ARE THE ISSUES? Marc Auboin: WTO Manuscript date: February 2010 Disclaimer: This is a working paper, and hence it represents research in progress. This paper represents the opinions of the author, and is the product of professional research. It is not meant to represent the position or opinions of the WTO or its Members, nor the official position of any staff members. Any errors are the fault of the author. Copies of working papers can be requested from the divisional secretariat by writing to: Economic Research and Statistics Division, World Trade Organization, Rue de Lausanne 154, CH 1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland. Please request papers by number and title. INTERNATIONAL REGULATION AND TREATMENT OF TRADE FINANCE: WHAT ARE THE ISSUES? Marc Auboin 1 Abstract The paper discusses a number of issues related to the treatment of trade credit internationally, a priori (treatment by banking regulators) and a posteriori (treatment by debtors and creditors in the case of default), which are currently of interest to the trade finance community, in particular the traditional providers of trade credit and guarantees, such as banks, export credit agencies, regional development banks, and multilateral agencies. The paper does not deal with the specific issue of regulation of official insured-export credit, under the OECD Arrangement, which is a specific matter left out of this analysis. Traditionally, trade finance has received preferred treatment on the part of national and international regulators, as well as by international financial agencies in the treatment of trade finance claims, on grounds that trade finance was one of the safest, most collateralized, and self- liquidating forms of trade finance.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance on Operational Risk BIA And
    CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA Guidance Notes on the Calculation of Capital Requirement for Operational Risk Basic Indicator Approach (BIA) and the Standardized Approach (TSA) TABLE OF CONTENTS OPERATIONAL RISK CAPITAL REQUIREMENT ........................................................................... 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Calculation Approaches ................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Adoption of Approaches ................................................................................................................. 4 2.0 GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT OF OPERATIONAL RISKS ................................... 4 2.1 Board and Management ................................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Processes and Procedure ............................................................................................................... 4 2.4 Reversion of Approaches ................................................................................................................ 5 2.5 Sound Practices for Operational Risk Management ........................................................... 5 3.0 BASIC INDICATOR APPROACH (BIA) ................................................................................. 5 3.1 Calculation Method .........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Basel III: Post-Crisis Reforms
    Basel III: Post-Crisis Reforms Implementation Timeline Focus: Capital Definitions, Capital Focus: Capital Requirements Buffers and Liquidity Requirements Basel lll 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 1 January 2022 Full implementation of: 1. Revised standardised approach for credit risk; 2. Revised IRB framework; 1 January 3. Revised CVA framework; 1 January 1 January 1 January 1 January 1 January 2018 4. Revised operational risk framework; 2027 5. Revised market risk framework (Fundamental Review of 2023 2024 2025 2026 Full implementation of Leverage Trading Book); and Output 6. Leverage Ratio (revised exposure definition). Output Output Output Output Ratio (Existing exposure floor: Transitional implementation floor: 55% floor: 60% floor: 65% floor: 70% definition) Output floor: 50% 72.5% Capital Ratios 0% - 2.5% 0% - 2.5% Countercyclical 0% - 2.5% 2.5% Buffer 2.5% Conservation 2.5% Buffer 8% 6% Minimum Capital 4.5% Requirement Core Equity Tier 1 (CET 1) Tier 1 (T1) Total Capital (Tier 1 + Tier 2) Standardised Approach for Credit Risk New Categories of Revisions to the Existing Standardised Approach Exposures • Exposures to Banks • Exposure to Covered Bonds Bank exposures will be risk-weighted based on either the External Credit Risk Assessment Approach (ECRA) or Standardised Credit Risk Rated covered bonds will be risk Assessment Approach (SCRA). Banks are to apply ECRA where regulators do allow the use of external ratings for regulatory purposes and weighted based on issue SCRA for regulators that don’t. specific rating while risk weights for unrated covered bonds will • Exposures to Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) be inferred from the issuer’s For exposures that do not fulfil the eligibility criteria, risk weights are to be determined by either SCRA or ECRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantifying Operational Risk: Possibilities and Limitations
    Quantifying Operational Risk: Possibilities and Limitations Hansj¨org Furrer ETH Z¨urich [email protected]/∼hjfurrer (Based on joint work with Paul Embrechts and Roger Kaufmann) Deutsche Bundesbank Training Centre, Eltville 19-20 March 2004 Managing OpRisk Contents A. The New Accord (Basel II) B. Risk measurement methods for OpRisks C. Advanced Measurement Approaches (AMA) D. Conclusions E. References Managing OpRisk 1 A. The New Accord (Basel II) • 1988: Basel Accord (Basel I): minimum capital requirements against credit risk. One standardised approach • 1996: Amendment to Basel I: market risk. • 1999: First Consultative Paper on the New Accord (Basel II). • 2003: CP3: Third Consultative Paper on the New Basel Capital Accord. (www.bis.org/bcbs/bcbscp3.htmcp3) • mid 2004: Revision of CP3 • end of 2006: full implementation of Basel II ([9]) Managing OpRisk 2 What’s new? • Rationale for the New Accord: More flexibility and risk sensitivity • Structure of the New Accord: Three-pillar framework: Pillar 1: minimal capital requirements (risk measurement) Pillar 2: supervisory review of capital adequacy Pillar 3: public disclosure Managing OpRisk 3 What’s new? (cont’d) • Two options for the measurement of credit risk: Standard approach Internal rating based approach (IRB) • Pillar 1 sets out the minimum capital requirements: total amount of capital ≥ 8% risk-weighted assets • MRC (minimum regulatory capital)def= 8% of risk-weighted assets • New regulatory capital approach for operational risk (the risk of losses resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems, or external events) Managing OpRisk 4 What’s new? (cont’d) • Notation: COP: capital charge for operational risk • Target: COP ≈ 12% of MRC • Estimated total losses in the US (2001): $50b • Some examples 1977: Credit Suisse Chiasso-affair 1995: Nick Leeson/Barings Bank, £1.3b 2001: Enron (largest US bankruptcy so far) 2003: Banque Cantonale de Vaudoise, KBV Winterthur Managing OpRisk 5 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Basel I, Basel II, and Basel III on Letters of Credit and Trade Finance
    Impact of Basel I, Basel II, and Basel III on Letters of Credit and Trade Finance Requirement Basel I Basel II Basel III 2013 2015 2019 Common Equity 2.0% of 3.5% of RWA 4.5% of RWA 4.5% of RWA RWA Tier 1 Capital 4.0% of 4.0% of 4.5% of RWA 6.0% of RWA 6.0% of RWA RWA RWA Total Capital 8.0% of 8.0% of 8.0% of RWA 8.0% of RWA 8.0% of RWA RWA RWA Capital Conversion -0- -0- +2.5% of RWA Buffer Leverage Ratio Observation Observation (4% of direct assets) (based on Total Capital) 3% of total direct and contingent assets Counter Cyclical Buffer +Up to 2.5% of RWA Liquidity Coverage Observation 30 days 30 days Net Stable Funding Observation Observation 1 year Additional Loss +1% to 2.5% of RWA Absorbency Color Code Key (US Applicability): (Applies only in the US) In the US, applies only to “Large, Internationally-Active Banks” Not yet implemented in the US Depending on the bank and the point in the economic cycle, under Basel III, the total capital requirement for a bank in 2019 may be as much as 15.5% of Risk-Weighted Assets (“RWA”), compared with 8% under Basel I and Basel II. The amount of Risk-Weighted Assets (“RWA”) is computed by multiplying the amount of each asset and contingent asset by a risk weighting and a Credit Conversion Factor (“CCF”) Under Basel I, risk weightings are set: 0% for sovereign obligors, 20% for banks where tenors ≤ one year, 50% for municipalities and residential mortgages, 100% for all corporate obligors Under Basel II, risk weightings are based on internal or external (rating agency) risk ratings with no special distinction for banks; capital requirements for exposures to banks are increased by as much as 650% (from 20% to as much as 150%) The Credit Conversion Factor for Letters of Credit varies under Basel I vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Basel Area Brochure
    Basel economic area Optimal conditions for business success Dear Reader The Basel economic area is home to Europe’s largest life sci- ences cluster. Successful pharmaceutical, biotech and agrochem- ical companies provide for the highest hourly productivity in the industry worldwide. Global companies such as Roche, Novartis and Syngenta, as well as many up-and-coming companies, for example Actelion, have their headquarters here. But Basel’s success is not only based on the life sciences. Studies by UBS and Credit Suisse show that the region today is optimally diversified in growth industries. These include the watch industry, medical engineering and logistics. The greatest strength of the Basel economic area lies in its geo- graphic concentration of skills in universities and companies. Moti- vated and highly qualified people working in research, develop- ment and applications are providing for the strongest economic growth in Switzerland. People feel at home in the Basel area. The population, around 30 percent of whom are foreigners, enjoys a cultural diversity and quality of life that are without parallel. Entrepreneurs appreciate the political stability, the legal certainty and an infrastructure that offers them a predictably ideal environment. Basel is one of the best business regions in the world. We would be happy to provide you with support in your efforts to settle in this first-class location. Dr. Franz Saladin CEO BaselArea 1 Open to the world. Basel is one of the world’s economic hotbeds. Companies based here benefit from a location that combines cosmopolitan living and an international environment with excellent operating conditions and a high quality of life.
    [Show full text]
  • BOT Notification No 15-2555 (29 September 2017)-Check 2
    Unofficial Translation This translation is for the convenience of those unfamiliar with the Thai language Please refer to Thai text for the official version -------------------------------------- Notification of the Bank of Thailand No. FPG. 15/2555 Re: Regulations on the Calculation of Credit Risk-Weighted Assets for Commercial Banks under the Standardised Approach (SA) _____________________________ 1. Rationale As the Bank of Thailand revised the Notification of the Bank of Thailand on Supervisory Guideline on Capital Requirement for Commercial Banks by referring to the Basel III framework: A global regulatory framework for more resilient banks and banking systems (Revised version: June 2011) of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, in order to ensure that commercial banks have high quality and adequate capital to absorb losses that may occur under normal and stress circumstance and to maintain the stability of financial system. The Basel III framework also includes improvement of the calculation of credit risk-weighted assets to better reflect credit risk of commercial banks. In this Notification, the Bank of Thailand thereby revises regulations on the calculation of credit risk-weighted assets under the Standardized Approach (SA) in order to be aligned with the revised regulations on components of capital, as certain items that are required to be deducted from capital under Basel II shall be calculated as credit risk-weighted assets instead, without any revisions made to the existing principles of the SA. For other items, commercial banks shall comply with existing regulations as prescribed by the Bank of Thailand. 2. Statutory Power By virtue of Sections 29, Section 30 and Section 32 of the Financial Institutions Businesses Act B.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Contagion in the Interbank Market with Stochastic Loss Given Default∗
    Contagion in the Interbank Market with Stochastic Loss Given Default∗ Christoph Memmel,a Angelika Sachs,b and Ingrid Steina aDeutsche Bundesbank bLMU Munich This paper investigates contagion in the German inter- bank market under the assumption of a stochastic loss given default (LGD). We combine a unique data set about the LGD of interbank loans with detailed data about interbank expo- sures. We find that the frequency distribution of the LGD is markedly U-shaped. Our simulations show that contagion in the German interbank market may happen. For the point in time under consideration, the assumption of a stochastic LGD leads on average to a more fragile banking system than under the assumption of a constant LGD. JEL Codes: D53, E47, G21. 1. Introduction The collapse of Lehman Brothers turned the 2007/2008 turmoil into a deep global financial crisis. But even before the Lehman default, interbank markets ceased to function properly. In particular, the ∗The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not nec- essarily reflect the opinions of the Deutsche Bundesbank. We thank Gabriel Frahm, Gerhard Illing, Ulrich Kr¨uger, Peter Raupach, Sebastian Watzka, two anonymous referees, and the participants at the Annual Meeting of the Euro- pean Economic Association 2011, the Annual Meeting of the German Finance Association 2011, the 1st Conference of the MaRs Network of the ESCB, the FSC workshop on stress testing and network analysis, as well as the research seminars of the Deutsche Bundesbank and the University of Munich for valu- able comments. Author contact: Memmel and Stein: Deutsche Bundesbank, Wilhelm-Epstein-Strasse 14, D-60431 Frankfurt, Germany; Tel: +49 (0) 69 9566 8531 (Memmel), +49 (0) 69 9566 8348 (Stein).
    [Show full text]
  • A Tax on Securitization
    BASEL II respect to losers as regulatory capital burdens increase. Basel II losers include lower-rated A tax on bank, corporate and ABS exposures, OECD sovereign exposures rated below AA- (although banks might hold them for liquidity purposes anyway), non-bank equities, and non-core, high operating cost securitization activities such as asset management. Among its many effects on banks’ regulatory capital, Basel II Portfolio rebalancing might prove to be an additional capital tax on securitization Depending on the extent to which lending margins change to align themselves with rom January 1 2010, Basel II will be in standardized banks, capital requirements will revised regulatory capital burdens, Basel II full effect. The new rules are scheduled vary from a 20% risk weight for the most might also prompt banks to rebalance their to come into effect for all EU banks creditworthy exposures (that is, €1.60 of portfolios by shedding losers and keeping on January 1 2007. One year later, capital for each €100 of exposure) to a 150% winners. Fadditional rules for advanced banks will come risk weight for the least creditworthy Banks might be more willing to retain into effect, with a two-year transition period. exposures (€12 of capital for each €100 of high-quality corporate exposures on their These rules will make highly-rated asset classes exposure). Securitization exposures held by balance sheets because their capital costs more popular, could lead to the restructuring of standardized banks will vary from a 20% risk would be lower than the cost of securitizing many conduits and will act as an additional weight for the most creditworthy exposures to them while retaining the capital-heavy lower capital tax on securitization.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Risk Management Guide
    OPERATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FOREST SERVICE 2020 Last Updated 02/26/2020 RISK MANAGEMENT COUNCIL IN COOPERATION WITH THE OFFICE OF SAFETY & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH and THE NATIONAL AVIATION SAFETY COUNCIL Contents Contents ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. i Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................................... 1 What is Operational Risk Management? ................................................................................................................... 1 The Terminology of ORM ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Principles of ORM Application ........................................................................................................................................... 6 The Five-Step ORM Process ................................................................................................................................................ 7 Step 1: Identify Hazards ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Credit Risk
    Chapter 5 Credit risk 5.1 Basic definitions Credit risk is a risk of a loss resulting from the fact that a borrower or counterparty fails to fulfill its obligations under the agreed terms (because he or she either cannot or does not want to pay). Besides this definition, the credit risk also includes the following risks: Sovereign risk is the risk of a government or central bank being unwilling or • unable to meet its contractual obligations. Concentration risk is the risk resulting from the concentration of transactions with • regard to a person, a group of economically associated persons, a government, a geographic region or an economic sector. It is the risk associated with any single exposure or group of exposures with the potential to produce large enough losses to threaten a bank's core operations, mainly due to a low level of diversification of the portfolio. Settlement risk is the risk resulting from a situation when a transaction settlement • does not take place according to the agreed conditions. For example, when trading bonds, it is common that the securities are delivered two days after the trade has been agreed and the payment has been made. The risk that this delivery does not occur is called settlement risk. Counterparty risk is the credit risk resulting from the position in a trading in- • strument. As an example, this includes the case when the counterparty does not honour its obligation resulting from an in-the-money option at the time of its ma- turity. It also important to note that the credit risk is related to almost all types of financial instruments.
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Adequacy Requirements (CAR)
    Guideline Subject: Capital Adequacy Requirements (CAR) Chapter 3 – Credit Risk – Standardized Approach Effective Date: November 2017 / January 20181 The Capital Adequacy Requirements (CAR) for banks (including federal credit unions), bank holding companies, federally regulated trust companies, federally regulated loan companies and cooperative retail associations are set out in nine chapters, each of which has been issued as a separate document. This document, Chapter 3 – Credit Risk – Standardized Approach, should be read in conjunction with the other CAR chapters which include: Chapter 1 Overview Chapter 2 Definition of Capital Chapter 3 Credit Risk – Standardized Approach Chapter 4 Settlement and Counterparty Risk Chapter 5 Credit Risk Mitigation Chapter 6 Credit Risk- Internal Ratings Based Approach Chapter 7 Structured Credit Products Chapter 8 Operational Risk Chapter 9 Market Risk 1 For institutions with a fiscal year ending October 31 or December 31, respectively Banks/BHC/T&L/CRA Credit Risk-Standardized Approach November 2017 Chapter 3 - Page 1 Table of Contents 3.1. Risk Weight Categories ............................................................................................. 4 3.1.1. Claims on sovereigns ............................................................................... 4 3.1.2. Claims on unrated sovereigns ................................................................. 5 3.1.3. Claims on non-central government public sector entities (PSEs) ........... 5 3.1.4. Claims on multilateral development banks (MDBs)
    [Show full text]