18.2 internal ratings based approach

Copyright © 2018 CapitaLogic Limited
This presentation file is prepared in accordance with
Chapter 18 of the text book
“Managing Credit Risk Under The Basel III Framework, 3rd ed”
Website : https://sites.google.com/site/crmbasel
E-mail : crmbasel@gmail.com
Chapter 18
Internal Ratings
Based Approach

Copyright © 2018 CapitaLogic Limited 2
Declaration
 Copyright © 2018 CapitaLogic Limited.
 All rights reserved. No part of this presentation file may be
reproduced, in any form or by any means, without written
permission from CapitaLogic Limited.
 Authored by Dr. LAM Yat-fai (林日辉),
Director, CapitaLogic Limited,
Adjunct Professor of Finance, City University of Hong Kong,
Doctor of Business Administration,
CFA, CAIA, CAMS, FRM, PRM.

Outline
 Theory of the IRB approach
 Retail IRB approach
 Advanced IRB approach
 Foundation IRB approach
 Implementation of the IRB approach

The IRB theory
 A bank holds a well diversified debt portfolio
 A large number of debts
 Smaller EAD
 Many debt issuers
 RMs unified to 1 year
Portfolio XCL = Portfolio EAD × LGD × XCDR
Portfolio 1-year EL = Portfolio EAD × LGD × PD
Portfolio UL = Portfolio XCL - Portfolio 1-year EL

Single debt UL
 For each debt k, define
 A total of NOB debts
k k k k
k k k k
k k k
1-year EL = EAD × LGD × PD
XCL =
UL
EAD × LGD ×
= XCL -
X DR
EL
C
NOB
k
k=1
EAD = Portfolio EAD
k
k
k
LGD LGD
XCDR XCDR
PD PD




Portfolio UL
 
NOB NOB
k k
k=1 k=1
NOB
k
k=1
Portfolio UL = Portfolio XCL - Portfolio 1-year EL
= Portfolio EAD × LGD × XCDR - Portfolio EAD × LGD × PD
= EAD × LGD × XCDR - EAD × LGD × PD
= EAD × LGD × XCDR - EAD
   
   
   
 
  
   
 
NOB
k
k=1
NOB NOB
k k k k k k
k=1 k=1
NOB
k k
k=1
NOB
k
k=1
× LGD × PD
EAD × LGD × XCDR - EAD × LGD × PD
= XCL - 1-year EL
= UL


 



Exposure at default
 On balance sheet debt
 Term loan, mortgage, bond
 EAD = Principal + Accrued Interest
 Commitment
 A promise to lend up to a certain amount
 Credit card, card line
 EAD = Drawdown amount
+ (Credit limit - Drawdown amount) × CCF
 CCF estimated by bank’s internal model

Loss given default
 Estimated by
 Bank’s internal quantitative model
 Taking into account collaterals
 Particularly important for residential
mortgage
 When property value goes up continuously
 LGD = 0 => Default loss = 0
 LGD floor is set artificially to 10%

Probability of default
 Estimated by
 Bank’s internal ratings system
 PD floor
 Minimum 0.03% except for a country which has
sole discretion on its currency policy

Residual maturity
 Effective RM
 Expected cash flow weighted RM; or
 Contractual maturity
 RM floor one year
 RM cap five years  
N
k k
k=1
N
k
k=1
CF × Tenor
RM =
CF


Example 18.1

IRB formulas by exposure
IRB approach
Retail IRB
Residential mortgage
Other retail exposure
A-IRB and F-IRB
SME corporate
exposure
Large financial
institution exposure
Institution exposure
Qualifying revolving
retail exposure

Outline
 Implementation of the IRB

Retail exposures
 Retail
 Individual person
 Small business
 with annual revenue < EUR 5 mn
 lending from a bank < EUR 1 mn
 Managed and calculated on a pool basis
 A large finite homogenous portfolio
 At least 300 debt issuers per pool
 EAD, LGD and PD estimated for each pool

A pool of residential mortgages
Example 18.2
   -1 -1
CCC = 0.15
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
XCL = EAD × LGD × XCDR
UL = XCL - 1-year EL
CP = 1-year EL
CC = 1.06UL
 
 
  

A pool of
qualifying revolving retail exposures
Example 18.3
   -1 -1
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
CP = 1-y
CCC =
ear EL
CC = 1.06UL
0.04
 
 
  

A pool of other retail exposures
Example 18.4
 
   -1 -1
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
UL = XCL - 1-
CCC = 0.03 + 0.
year EL
CP = 1-year EL
CC = 1.06
13exp -3
U
5PD
L
 
 
  

Outline

Institution exposure
Example 18.5
 
 
2
b = 0.11852 - 0.05478ln PD
1 + RM -
CP = 1-yea
2.5 b
M
r
AF =
1
EL
CC = 1.06UL ×
- 1.5b
MAF
  
 
   -1 -1
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
1-year EL = E
C
A
CC = 0.12 1
D × LGD ×
+ exp -
PD
50PD  
 
 
  

SME corporate exposure
Example 18.6
 
 
2
b = 0.11852 - 0.05478ln PD
1 + RM - 2.5 b
MAF =
1 - 1.5b
CP = 1-year EL
CC = 1.06UL × MAF
  
 
   -1 -1
CCC = 0.12 1 + exp -50PD
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
1-year EL = EAD
S - 5
× LGD × PD
UL = XCL - 1-y
0
+
112
ear EL
5
  
 
 
  
For a SME with total annual
revenue < EUR 50 mn
S: Total annual revenue in EUR mn

Large financial institution exposure
Example 18.7
 
 
2
b = 0.11852 - 0.05478ln PD
1 + RM - 2.5 b
MAF =
1 - 1.5b
CP = 1-year EL
CC = 1.06UL × MAF
  
 
   -1 -1
CCC = 1 + exp -50PD
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
UL = XCL - 1-year
0.15
EL
  
 
 
  
For a financial institution with
total assets > USD 100 bn

Credit risk mitigation
 Reduction of EAD
 On balance sheet netting
 Reduction of LGD
 Collaterals
 Reduction of PD
 Default insurance
 Credit guarantee
 CDS

On balance sheet netting
 Bilateral netting agreement in place
 
Net EAD
Lending EAD
= Max - Borrowing EAD 1 - Currency haircut ,
0
 
 
 
 
 

Default insurance
 Credit guarantor/protection independent of debt
issuer
 Substitution framework
 For both retail and advanced IRB approaches
 Credit guarantor/protection seller with higher credit
quality
 PD of credit guarantor/protection seller adopted in the
calculations of CP and CC
 Double default framework
 For advanced IRB approach only
 CP and CC calculated by double default IRB formulas
Example 18.8

Double default framework
Example 18.9
  
 
o g
g
2
b = 0.11852 - 0.05478ln
1 + RM - 2.5 b
Min PD , PD
DDF = 0.15 + 160PD
CP
MAF =
1 - 1.5b
CC = 1.06UL × MAF
= 0
DDF×
 
 
 
 
 
   
o
o
o
-1 -1
o
o
CCC = 0.12 1 + exp -50PD or
S - 50
CCC = 0.12 1 + exp -50PD + or
1125
CCC = 0.15 1 + exp -50PD
Φ PD + Φ 99.9% CCC
XCDR = Φ
1 - CCC
UL = XC
  
  
  
 
 
  
L - 1-year EL

Currency and maturity mis-matches
 Currency mis-match
 Protected part reduced by 8%
 Maturity mis-match
 Protected part reduced to
 RM > 0.25
 RM < 0.25
 Credit risk control ignored simply
 
 
EAD of the protected part without maturity mis-match
Min Protection period of credit risk control, 5 - 0.25
×
Min RM of debt, 5 - 0.25
Example 18.10
Example 18.11

Outline

Exposure at default
Type of commitment CCF (%)
1. Direct credit substitutes 100
2. Transaction related contingencies 50
3. Trade related contingencies 20
4. Asset sales with recourse 100
5. Forward asset purchases 100
6. Partly paid-up securities 100
7. Forward forward deposits placed 100
8. Note issuance and revolving underwriting facilities 75
9. Commitments that are unconditionally cancellable without prior notice 0
10. Other commitments 75*
* Different from the standardized approach

Loss given default
 45% for senior debt
 75% for subordinated debt
 Recognized collaterals
 Financial collaterals in standardized approach
 IRB collaterals
 Financial receivables
 Real estate
 Physical assets

Financial collaterals
Collateral and
credit rating
Constituent /
residual maturity
Corporation
and bank (%)
Country (%)
Debt
AAA and
AA
Up to 1 year 1 0.5
From 1 to 5 years 4 2
Longer than 5 years 8 4
A and BBB
Up to 1 year 2 1
From 1 to 5 years 6 3
Longer than 5 years 12 6
BB 15
Equity of a listed
company
Constituent of a major
equity index
15
Not a constituent of
major equity indices
25
Others 100
Mutual fund The largest haircut among the investment components

Senior debt with financial collaterals
EAD - Collateral value
1 - Collateral haircut
Max ×
- Currency haircut
0
LGD = 45% ×
EAD
 
 
  
   
 
  

IRB collaterals
Lower bound
C* (%)
Upper bound
C** (%)
Collateral
LGD (%)
Financial
receivables 0 125 35
Real estate 30 140 35
Physical assets 30 140 40

Senior debt subject to IRB collaterals
*
**
** **
Collateral value
C =
EAD
45% C less than C
LGD = Collateral LGD C greater than C
C C
45% × 1 - + Collateral LGD × C in between
C C
 
 
 

Probability of default
and residual maturity
 PD
 Following the advanced IRB approach
 RM
 2.5 years; or
 Following the advanced IRB approach, subject to
regulatory approval

Outline
 Implementation of the IRB approach

Capital charge
calculation approaches
Sophist
-ication
Approach
Internal
model
Regulatory
rule
High
Retail IRB*
Advanced
IRB
EAD, LGD,
PD, RM
Medium
Foundation
IRB
PD, RM EAD, LGD
PD
EAD, LGD,
RM
Low Standardized EAD, CCR
* RM not applicable

Benefits of the IRB approach
 Savings on regulatory capital
 Less capital charge for debts of higher credit
quality
 Material savings on retail lending
 An exhibition of advanced credit risk
management expertise

Comparison: capital charge ratio
Exposure LGD (%) RM (yr) Approach AA (%) A (%) BBB (%) BB (%) B (%)
Retail 90
IRB 0.82 1.66 4.32 10.38 11.79
Standardized 6 6 6 6 6
Institute
45 1
IRB 0.70 1.39 3.52 8.43 12.95
Standardized 1.6 4 4 8 8
75 1
IRB 1.16 2.32 5.86 14.73 21.58
Standardized 1.6 4 4 8 8
Example 18.12, 18.13, 18.14

Internal ratings system
 A consolidated opinion from
 PD derived from quantitative model
 Agency credit rating
 Specialist judgment
 Internal rating => average PD
 7-level
 AAA, AA, A, BBB, BB, B, C
 19-level
 AAA, AA (+/-), A (+/-), BBB (+/-),
BB (+/-), B (+/-), CCC, CC, C

IRB system
Credit data Rating systems Capital
charge engine
Regulatory reports
EAD, LGD,
PD, RM
CP, CC

Capital charge engine

18.2 internal ratings based approach

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 18.2 internal ratings based approach

Similar to 18.2 internal ratings based approach (20)

More from crmbasel

More from crmbasel (17)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

18.2 internal ratings based approach