DOCSLIB.ORG

The State of the Art in Credit Portfolio Modeling

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The State of the Art in Credit Portfolio Modeling TRENDS IN PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT The State of the Art in Credit Portfolio Modeling by Charles W. Smithson and Gregory Hayt his is the second of a series of five excerpts from a forth- coming book Managing Credit Risk: Toward a Portfolio T Approach to Credit Risk Management by Charles Smithson and Gregory Hayt of Rutter Associates. Future articles will appear in the May, July/August, and October 2001 issues. quity investors have given level of return or increase an investor might wish to include enthusiastically embraced expected return for a given level a “loser” in the portfolio, as long Ethe concepts of diversifica- of risk. In marked contrast to the as that asset has a very low (or tion and asset allocation. Modern pick-winners philosophy that negative) correlation with other portfolio theory (MPT) has trans- dominated equity investing assets in the portfolio. formed equity portfolio manage- through the 1960s, this means that ment from a philosophy of “pick- ing winners” to one where Figure 1 investors strive to hold an “effi- Modern Portfolio Theory cient portfolio.” The central fea- The Efficient Frontier—The portfolios that ture of MPT is an efficient portfo- simultaneously maximize expected return for a given level of risk and minimize risk for a lio that simultaneously maximizes given level of expected return expected return for a given level of risk and minimizes risk for a given level of return. Expected Return Recognition of correlation is The “Feasible Set”—All the key to the benefits of holding possible portfolios of securities a well-diversified portfolio. If the returns of two assets are less than perfectly positively correlated, an investor can reduce the risk for a Risk (Standard Deviation) © 2001 by RMA and Rutter Associates. Smithson is managing partner and Hayt is principal at Rutter Associates, a New York-based risk management consultancy. Smithson and Hayt have both presented at RMA conferences and have co- authored other articles in The RMA Journal. 34 The RMA Journal March 2001 The State of the Art in Credit Portfolio Modeling Challenges to the credit assets have more dimen- to consolidate into a workable cen- Implementation of MPT for sions than equity as well, includ- tral database reflects the tradition- Portfolios of Credit Assets ing uncertain usage of credit lines, al originate-and-hold strategy at While MPT has driven equity uncertain losses in the event of most financial institutions in portfolio management for more default, collateral, and the ability which loans are viewed in isolation than 30 years, it is still not widely to restructure assets by changing rather than as part of a portfolio. applied to credit assets. The norm the terms of the lending agree- Another problem area for loans and other credit assets is ment. involves estimates of expected still for a financial institution to In addition, credit portfolio return, risk, and correlation. For originate the asset and then hold it management requires more than a credit assets, these parameters until it matures or defaults. One mean/variance view of the world. are, themselves, determined by reason for this is that portfolios of The credit portfolio manager the probability of default (down- credit assets present more chal- places much more emphasis on grade), the volatility of the proba- lenges to the implementation of extreme outcomes—“tail” bility of default (downgrade), loss MPT than do portfolios of equities. events—to determine economic in the event of default, and the capital and credit rating. correlation of defaults (or down- Distribution of losses. The grades). As noted earlier, there is mean-variance (that is, normally Data limitations. Arguably, limited data on the historical per- distributed) environment assumed the largest obstacle to the applica- formance of credit assets from by MPT is less justifiable for port- tion of portfolio theory in banks is which to estimate these parame- folios of credit assets than for the lack of clean, consistent data. ters. However, in the case of portfolios of equities. As is illus- One problem area involves stand-alone measures of the risk trated in Figure 2, the loss distri- the data on existing and new and return of individual credits, butions for loans and other credit loans. Financial institutions are there is an increasing array of assets are not normally distributed making significant investments in choices. and are not even symmetric. And order to locate data (often still in Figure 3 (next page) provides a there is limited data on the histor- original loan documents), to recon- listing of sources of information on ical performance of credit assets cile different systems, clean and probabilities of default for public from which the appropriate shape validate data, and develop an and private firms. Each of the of the loss distribution could be infrastructure to maintain the data default models uses proprietary estimated. Credit has strong going forward. The fact that data analytics with inputs ranging from option-like characteristics, and on credit portfolios is so difficult financial statements alone, to finan- cial statements plus equity market Figure 1 data, and to systems based entirely Losses from Loans and Other Credit Assets on spreads on traded assets. Are Not Normally Distributed Figure 4 summarizes sources for loss given default (LGD) and Observed Distribution of Losses usage of committed facilities by defaulting firms. Of course, large financial institutions have consid- erable internal data, if they can Normal Distribution organize it, on these variables. There also are important industry, academic, and commercial studies that have added to our knowledge through the pooling or collecting -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 of data across institutions. Promised Return 100% (No Loss) Loss 35 The State of the Art in Credit Portfolio Modeling First Generation Credit Portfolio released its CreditMetricsTM 1998. During the same period, Models methodology (and the Credit- many firms had or were develop- The public release of credit ManagerTM software package) in ing internal models for credit portfolio models began in the mid 1997. Also in 1997, Credit Suisse portfolio management. Many of 1990s. KMV released Portfolio First Boston introduced its the internal models addressed ManagerTM in 1993. The CreditRisk+TM . McKinsey intro- assets that were not covered by RiskMetrics Group (RMG) duced CreditPortfolioViewTM in the initial releases of the public models, including middle market Figure 3 corporate lending and consumer lending. Sources of Standalone Risk Estimates for Credit Assets These four models are imple- mentations of three broad Vendor Product Description approaches: KMV Credit Expected Default FrequencyTM Monitorw/ (EDF TM ) credit measures for public 1. Asset volatility CreditEdgeTM firms updated monthly/daily. Private approach. The risk of default or w Firm Model also available. downgrade is modeled in terms of Kamakura Corporation KRM—crTM Default probability derived from credit the value of a firm’s assets relative spreads to its liabilities. These models are also called structural models be- Loan Pricing Corporation Risk Rater TM Default probability and expected loss for cause the risk of default/down- commercial loans grade is derived from a formal Moody’s RiskCalcTM Default probabilities for public or private model of credit risk at the firm firms level. TM Standard & Poor’s CreditPro Historical marginal and cumulative 2. Actuarial approach. The default rates by industry and geography risk of default and the loss given Standard & Poor’s CreditModel TM Implied credit ratings for public or default are assumed to fit certain private firms distributions. This assumption EnronCredit.com Enron Cost of Default probability estimates coupled makes it possible to calculate the Credit TM with historical recovery data distribution of portfolio losses analytically. In some ways, this Figure 4 approach is closest to the original mean/variance approach of Sources of Data on Loss Given Default and Usage of Markowitz, which assumes nor- Committed Lines mally distributed asset returns and yields closed form results for Study or portfolio risk and security risk Source Database? Description of Data Altman & Kishore (96) Recovery study Recovery on bonds organized by seniority (Beta). and industry 3. Factor model approach. Carty & Lieberman (96) Default and Recovery data by seniority; Post default The probability of default is (Moody’s) recovery study default secondary market prices assumed to depend on the state of Loan Pricing Corporation Loan Loss Historical loss data for a large sample of such user-defined factors as GDP, credit assets unemployment, commodity S&P/Portfolio Loss/Recovery Historical data for a large sample of prices, and so forth. These models Management Data Database credit assets are quite general in that no under- Asarnow & Marker (95) Study of usage Usage by credit rating and loss given lying theory determines which of committed default factors are most appropriate or credit lines what weights should apply to 36 The RMA Journal March 2001 The State of the Art in Credit Portfolio Modeling changes in each factor. This lack simulated macro factors. In all of default rate volatility. of formal structure makes them the models, the user supplies the The segment allocation and very flexible and extremely trans- expected loss given default to the default rate volatility imply a cor- parent, since the risk of default is model. relation between default rates for linked explicitly to systematic Not surprisingly, the models any pair of obligors. In Credit- variables and a firm-specific com- differ in the way that they deal PortfolioView, default (down- ponent. with the correlation of defaults grade) correlation enters the Figure 5 provides an overview (downgrades). Correlation in model through the correlation of of the four widely-discussed credit Portfolio Manager is obtained by a the chosen macro factors and esti- portfolio models. The first row factor model of asset returns, mated factor weights.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Personal Loans 101: Understanding Your Credit Risk Loans Have Some Risk for Both the Borrower and the Lender
    PERSONAL LOANS 101: Understanding YoUr credit risk Loans have some risk for both the borrower and the lender. The borrower takes on the responsibilities and terms of paying back the loan. The lender’s risk is the chance of non-payment. Consumers can choose from several types of loans. As a borrower, you need to understand the type of loan you are considering and its possible risk. This brochure provides information to help you make a smart choice before applying for a loan. 2 It is important to review your financial situation to see if you can handle another monthly payment before applying for a loan. Creating a budget will help you apply for the loan that best meets your present and future needs. For an interactive budget, visit www.afsaef.org/budgetplanner or www.afsaef.org/personalloans101. You will need to show the lender that you can repay what you borrow, with interest. After you have made a budget, consider these factors, which maY redUce or add risk to a Loan. 3 abiLitY to repaY the Loan Is the lender evaluating your ability to repay the loan based on facts such as your credit history, current and expected income, current expenses, debt-to- income ratio (your expenses compared to your income) and employment status? This assessment, often called underwriting, helps determine if you can make the monthly payment and raises your chances of getting a loan to fit your needs that you can afford to repay. It depends on you providing complete and correct information to the lender. Testing “your ability to repay” and appropriate “underwriting” reduces your risk when taking out any type of loan.
    [Show full text]
  • Credit Risk Models
    Lecture notes on risk management, public policy, and the financial system Credit risk models Allan M. Malz Columbia University Credit risk models Outline Overview of credit risk analytics Single-obligor credit risk models © 2020 Allan M. Malz Last updated: February 8, 2021 2/32 Credit risk models Overview of credit risk analytics Overview of credit risk analytics Credit risk metrics and models Intensity models and default time analytics Single-obligor credit risk models 3/32 Credit risk models Overview of credit risk analytics Credit risk metrics and models Key metrics of credit risk Probability of default πt defined over a time horizon t, e.g. one year Exposure at default: amount the lender can lose in default For a loan or bond, par value plus accrued interest For OTC derivatives, also driven by market value Net present value (NPV) 0 ( counterparty risk) S → But exposure at default 0 ≥ Recovery: creditor generally loses fraction of exposure R < 100 percent Loss given default (LGD) equals exposure minus recovery (a fraction 1 − R) Expected loss (EL) equals default probability × LGD or fraction πt × (1 − R) Credit risk management focuses on unexpected loss Credit Value-at-Risk related to a quantile of the credit return distribution Differs from market risk in excluding EL Credit VaR at confidence level of α defined as: 1 − α-quantile of credit loss distribution − EL 4/32 Credit risk models Overview of credit risk analytics Credit risk metrics and models Estimating default probabilities Risk-neutral default probabilities based on market
    [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]
  • Guidance for Managing Third-Party Risk
    GUIDANCE FOR MANAGING THIRD-PARTY RISK Introduction An institution’s board of directors and senior management are ultimately responsible for managing activities conducted through third-party relationships, and identifying and controlling the risks arising from such relationships, to the same extent as if the activity were handled within the institution. This guidance includes a description of potential risks arising from third-party relationships, and provides information on identifying and managing risks associated with financial institutions’ business relationships with third parties.1 This guidance applies to any of an institution’s third-party arrangements, and is intended to be used as a resource for implementing a third-party risk management program. This guidance provides a general framework that boards of directors and senior management may use to provide appropriate oversight and risk management of significant third-party relationships. A third-party relationship should be considered significant if the institution’s relationship with the third party is a new relationship or involves implementing new bank activities; the relationship has a material effect on the institution’s revenues or expenses; the third party performs critical functions; the third party stores, accesses, transmits, or performs transactions on sensitive customer information; the third party markets bank products or services; the third party provides a product or performs a service involving subprime lending or card payment transactions; or the third party poses risks that could significantly affect earnings or capital. The FDIC reviews a financial institution’s risk management program and the overall effect of its third-party relationships as a component of its normal examination process.
    [Show full text]
  • Credit Risk Measurement: Developments Over the Last 20 Years
    Journal of Banking & Finance 21 (1998) 1721±1742 Credit risk measurement: Developments over the last 20 years Edward I. Altman, Anthony Saunders * Salomon Brothers Center, Leonard Stern School of Business, New York University, 44 West 4th street, New York, NY 10012, USA Abstractz This paper traces developments in the credit risk measurement literature over the last 20 years. The paper is essentially divided into two parts. In the ®rst part the evolution of the literature on the credit-risk measurement of individual loans and portfolios of loans is traced by way of reference to articles appearing in relevant issues of the Journal of Banking and Finance and other publications. In the second part, a new approach built around a mortality risk framework to measuring the risk and returns on loans and bonds is presented. This model is shown to oer some promise in analyzing the risk-re- turn structures of portfolios of credit-risk exposed debt instruments. Ó 1998 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. JEL classi®cation: G21; G28 Keywords: Banking; Credit risk; Default 1. Introduction Credit risk measurement has evolved dramatically over the last 20 years in response to a number of secular forces that have made its measurement more * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 212 998 0711; fax: +1 212 995 4220; e-mail: asaun- [email protected]. 0378-4266/97/$17.00 Ó 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII S 0 3 7 8 - 4 2 6 6 ( 9 7 ) 0 0 0 3 6 - 8 1722 E.I. Altman, A. Saunders / Journal of Banking & Finance 21 (1998) 1721±1742 important than ever before.
    [Show full text]
  • FICO Mortgage Credit Risk Managers Handbook
    FICO Mortgage Credit Risk Manager’s Best Practices Handbook Craig Focardi Senior Research Director Consumer Lending, TowerGroup September 2009 Executive Summary The mortgage credit and liquidity crisis has triggered a downward spiral of job losses, declining home prices, and rising mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures. The residential mortgage lending industry faces intense pressures. Mortgage servicers must better manage the rising tide of defaults and return financial institutions to profitability while responding quickly to increased internal, regulatory, and investor reporting requirements. These circumstances have moved management of mortgage credit risk from backstage to center stage. The risk management function cuts across the loan origination, collections, and portfolio risk management departments and is now a focus in mortgage servicers’ strategic planning, financial management, and lending operations. The imperative for strategic focus on credit risk management as well as information technology (IT) resource allocation to this function may seem obvious today. However, as recently as June 2007, mortgage lenders continued to originate subprime and other risky mortgages while investing little in new mortgage collections and infrastructure, technology, and training for mortgage portfolio management. Moreover, survey results presented in this Handbook reveal that although many mortgage servicers have increased mortgage collections and loss mitigation staffing, few servicers have invested sufficiently in data management, predictive analytics, scoring and reporting technology to identify the borrowers most at risk, implement appropriate treatments for different customer segments, and reduce mortgage re-defaults and foreclosures. The content of this Handbook is based on a survey that FICO, a leader in decision management, analytics, and scoring, commissioned from TowerGroup, a leading research and advisory firm focusing on the strategic application of technology in financial services.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Risk Section 2070.1
    Legal Risk Section 2070.1 An institution’s trading and capital-markets will prove unenforceable. Many trading activi- activities can lead to significant legal risks. ties, such as securities trading, commonly take Failure to correctly document transactions can place without a signed agreement, as each indi- result in legal disputes with counterparties over vidual transaction generally settles within a very the terms of the agreement. Even if adequately short time after the trade. The trade confirma- documented, agreements may prove to be unen- tions generally provide sufficient documentation forceable if the counterparty does not have the for these transactions, which settle in accor- authority to enter into the transaction or if the dance with market conventions. Other trading terms of the agreement are not in accordance activities involving longer-term, more complex with applicable law. Alternatively, the agree- transactions may necessitate more comprehen- ment may be challenged on the grounds that the sive and detailed documentation. Such documen- transaction is not suitable for the counterparty, tation ensures that the institution and its coun- given its level of financial sophistication, finan- terparty agree on the terms applicable to the cial condition, or investment objectives, or on transaction. In addition, documentation satisfies the grounds that the risks of the transaction were other legal requirements, such as the ‘‘statutes of not accurately and completely disclosed to the frauds’’ that may apply in many jurisdictions. investor. Statutes of frauds generally require signed, writ- As part of sound risk management, institu- ten agreements for certain classes of contracts, tions should take steps to guard themselves such as agreements with a duration of more than against legal risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Operational Risk Management: an Evolving Discipline
    Operational Risk Management: An Evolving Discipline Operational risk is not a new concept in scope. Before attempting to define the the banking industry. Risks associated term, it is essential to understand that with operational failures stemming from operational risk is present in all activities events such as processing errors, internal of an organization. As a result, some of and external fraud, legal claims, and the earliest practitioners defined opera- business disruptions have existed at tional risk as every risk source that lies financial institutions since the inception outside the areas covered by market risk of banking. As this article will discuss, and credit risk. But this definition of one of the great challenges in systemati- operational risk includes several other cally managing these types of risks is risks (such as interest rate, liquidity, and that operational losses can be quite strategic risk) that banks manage and diverse in their nature and highly unpre- does not lend itself to the management dictable in their overall financial impact. of operational risk per se. As part of the revised Basel framework,1 the Basel Banks have traditionally relied on Committee on Banking Supervision set appropriate internal processes, audit forth the following definition: programs, insurance protection, and other risk management tools to counter- Operational risk is defined as the act various aspects of operational risk. risk of loss resulting from inadequate These tools remain of paramount impor- or failed internal processes, people, tance; however, growing complexity in and systems or from external events. the banking industry, several large and This definition includes legal risk, but widely publicized operational losses in excludes strategic and reputational recent years, and a changing regulatory risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Interest Rates and Credit Risk∗
    Interest Rates and Credit Risk∗ Carlos González-Aguado Javier Suarez Bluecap M. C. CEMFI and CEPR January 2014 Abstract This paper explores the effects of shifts in interest rates on corporate leverage and default in the context of a dynamic model in which the link between leverage and de- fault risk comes from the lower incentives of overindebted entrepreneurs to guarantee firm survival. The need to finance new investment pushes firms’ leverage ratio above some state-contingent target towards which firms gradually adjust through earnings retention. The response to interest rate rises and cuts is both asymmetric and hetero- geneously distributed across firms. Our results helps rationalize some of the evidence regarding the risk-taking channel of monetary policy. Keywords: interest rates, short-term debt, search for yield, credit risk, firm dynamics. JEL Classification: G32, G33, E52. ∗We would like to thank James Tengyu Guo for his excellent research assistance, and Oscar Arce, Arturo Bris, Andrea Caggese, Robert Kollmann, Xavier Ragot, Rafael Re- pullo, Enrique Sentana, David Webb, and the editor (Kenneth West) and two anony- mous referees for helpful comments and suggestions. The paper has also benefited from feedback from seminar participants at the 2009 European Economic Association Meet- ing, the 2010 World Congress of the Econometric Society, Banco de España, Bank of Japan, CEMFI, CNMV, European Central Bank, Instituto de Empresa, London Business School, Norges Bank, Swiss National Bank, Universidad Carlos III, Universi- dad de Navarra, the XVIII Foro de Finanzas, the JMCB conference “Macroeconomics and Financial Intermediation: Directions Since the Crisis,” and the LBS Conference on “The Macroeconomics of Financial Stability.” Suarez acknowledges support from Spanish government grant ECO2011-26308.
    [Show full text]
  • Credit Risk Management Version 1.0 July 2013 ______Introduction
    Credit Risk Management Version 1.0 July 2013 ______________________________________________________________________________ Introduction Credit risk is the potential that a borrower or counterparty will fail to meet its obligations in accordance with agreed terms. Credit risk includes the decline in measured quality of a credit exposure that might result in increased capital costs, provisioning expenses, and a reduction in economic return. This examination module applies to the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises) (the FHLBanks and the Enterprises are referred to collectively as the regulated entities). These institutions need to monitor, measure, and manage the aggregate credit risk inherent in all credit exposures, as well as the risk in individual credits or transactions. The institutions should also consider the relationships between credit risk and other risks. Sound credit risk management has important implications for determinations as to whether the regulated entities hold adequate capital for credit risk and determinations about how adequately they are compensated for risks incurred. The largest sources of credit risk to the Enterprises are securitized loans, loans held in portfolio, other real estate owned (REO), and investment securities. The largest sources of credit risk to the FHLBanks are advances, Acquired Member Assets (AMA) programs, and investment securities. (See the examination modules on Advances and Collateral and AMA for background information and the workprograms applicable to those topics). Credit risk management practices may differ among the regulated entities, due to the nature of their respective credit activities. A comprehensive credit risk management program will address at least four areas: (i) establishing an appropriate credit risk environment; (ii) operating under a sound credit-granting process; (iii) maintaining an appropriate credit administration, measurement, and monitoring process; and (iv) ensuring adequate controls over credit risk have been established.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Risk Management
    THE PAYMENTS INSTITUTE — July 20-23, 2014 Emory Conference Center Hotel, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia Principles of Risk Management Norman Robinson, AAP President & CEO EastPay, Providing Payments Expertise® Agenda • Risk management terminology and concepts • The risk management lifecycle • Define risk categories and elements • Define enterprise or operational risk • Define cross-channel risk • Review • Discussion 2 Learning Objectives • Understand and recognize the elements of risk, including strategic, liquidity, reputational, fraud, credit, transactional, compliance, operational, cross channel) • Understand how these risk elements apply across payment channels 3 4 5 Five Steps to Risk Management 1. Identify and understand your major risks 5. Align 2. Decide strategies and which risks the organization Risk are natural around risk 4. Embed risk 3. Determine in all decisions capacity and & processes tolerance for risk 6 Payments Used to be simple Cash Banking Circa 1970 Wire Checks Transfer 7 Payments are now more complex Cash Mobile Checks Wire Virtual Transfer Banking Circa 2014 Remote ATM’s Deposit Debit ACH Cards Credit Cards 8 Risk Categories 1. Financial Risks 2. Management Risks 3. Operational Risk 9 1. Financial Risks • Interest rate – Deposit terms and rates • Price – Non-interest income • Liquidity – Deposit operations fund the bank 10 Financial Risks Interest Rate • Asset Liability Committee (ALCO) in place • Assets = ? • Liabilities = ? • Spread • Impact on earnings today? • Impact on earnings next year? • Stress tests • Emphasis on Capital 11 Financial Risks Pricing • Direct impact on earnings • Missed opportunities • FI’s philosophy • Customer relations • Market relevance • Regulatory intervention – Overdraft programs – Durbin amendment – Dodd-Frank Amendment 1073 – CFPB 12 Financial Risks Liquidity • Deposit operations provide the overwhelming majority of funding for loan operations • Interest rates and pricing impact liquidity • Critical to success of the bank – Many recent failures were liquidity driven 13 2.
    [Show full text]