Title[ Part 2: The First Pillar - Minimum Capital Requirements
Section[ 3. Collateral
(i) Eligible financial collateral
145. The following collateral instruments are eligible for recognition in the simple approach:
(a) Cash (as well as certificates of deposit or comparable instruments issued by the lending bank) on deposit with the bank which is incurring the counterparty exposure. 42, 43
(b) Gold.
(c) Debt securities rated by a recognised external credit assessment institution where these are either:
w at least BB- when issued by sovereigns or PSEs that are treated as sovereigns by the national supervisor; or
w at least BBB- when issued by other entities (including banks and securities firms);
or
w at least A-3/P-3 for short-term debt instruments.
(d) Debt securities not rated by a recognised external credit assessment institution where these are:
w issued by a bank; and
w listed on a recognised exchange; and
w classified as senior debt; and
w all rated issues of the same seniority by the issuing bank must be rated at least BBB- or A-3/P-3 by a recognised external credit assessment institution; and
w the bank holding the securities as collateral has no information to suggest that the issue justifies a rating below BBB- or A-3/P-3 (as applicable); and
w the supervisor is sufficiently confident about the market liquidity of the security.
(e) Equities (including convertible bonds) that are included in a main index.
(f) Undertakings for Collective Investments in Transferable Securities (UCITS) and mutual funds where:
w a price for the units is publicly quoted daily; and
w the UCITS/mutual fund is limited to investing in the instruments listed in this paragraph. 44
146. The following collateral instruments are eligible for recognition in the comprehensive approach:
(a) All of the instruments in paragraph 145;
(b) Equities (including convertible bonds) which are not included in a main index but which are listed on a recognised exchange;
(c) UCITS/mutual funds which include such equities.
(ii) The comprehensive approach
Calculation of capital requirement
147. For a collateralised transaction, the exposure amount after risk mitigation is calculated as follows:
E* = max {0, [E x (1 + He) – C x (1 – Hc – Hfx)]}
where:
E* = the exposure value after risk mitigation
E = current value of the exposure
He = haircut appropriate to the exposure
C = the current value of the collateral received
Hc = haircut appropriate to the collateral
Hfx = haircut appropriate for currency mismatch between the collateral and exposure
148. The exposure amount after risk mitigation will be multiplied by the risk weight of the counterparty to obtain the risk-weighted asset amount for the collateralised transaction.
149. The treatment for transactions where there is a mismatch between the maturity of the counterparty exposure and the collateral is given in paragraphs 202 to 205.
150. Where the collateral is a basket of assets, the haircut on the basket will be
?????i iH a H , where ai is the weight of the asset (as measured by units of currency) in the
i
basket and Hi the haircut applicable to that asset.
Standard supervisory haircuts
151. These are the standard supervisory haircuts (assuming daily mark-to-market, daily remargining and a 10-business day holding period), expressed as percentages:
Issue rating for
debt securities Residual Maturity Sovereigns 45, 46 Other issuers 47
AAA to AA-/A-1 ? 1 year 0.5 1
>1 year, <= 5 years 2 4
> 5 years 4 8
A+ to BBB-/ ? 1 year 1 2
A-2/A-3/P-3 and >1 year, ? 5 years 3 6
unrated bank > 5 years 6 12
securities per para.
145(d)
BB+ to BB- All 15
Main index equities (including convertible 15
bonds) and Gold
Other equities (including convertible bonds) 25
listed on a recognised exchange
UCITS/Mutual funds Highest haircut applicable to any security in
which the fund can invest
Cash in the same currency 48 0
152. The standard supervisory haircut for currency risk where exposure and collateral are denominated in different currencies is 8% (also based on a 10-business day holding period and daily mark-to-market)
153. For transactions in which the bank lends non-eligible instruments (e.g. non- investment grade corporate debt securities), the haircut to be applied on the exposure should be the same as the one for equity traded on a recognised exchange that is not part of a main index.
Own estimates for haircuts
154. Supervisors may permit banks to calculate haircuts using their own internal estimates of market price volatility and foreign exchange volatility. Permission to do so will be conditional on the satisfaction of minimum qualitative and quantitative standards stated in paragraphs 156 to 165. When debt securities are rated BBB-/A-3 or higher, supervisors may allow banks to calculate a volatility estimate for each category of security. In determining relevant categories, institutions must take into account (a) the type of issuer of the security,
(b) its rating, (c) its residual maturity, and (d) its modified duration. Volatility estimates must be representative of the securities actually included in the category for that bank. For debt securities rated below BBB-/A-3 or for equities eligible as collateral (lightly shaded boxes in the above table), the haircuts must be calculated for each individual security.
155. Banks must estimate the volatility of the collateral instrument or foreign exchange mismatch individually: estimated volatilities for each transaction must not take into account the correlations between unsecured exposure, collateral and exchange rates (see paragraphs 202 to 205 for the approach to maturity mismatches).
Quantitative criteria
156. In calculating the haircuts, a 99th percentile, one-tailed confidence interval is to be used.
157. The minimum holding period will be dependent on the type of transaction and the frequency of remargining or marking to market. The minimum holding periods for different types of transactions are presented in paragraph 167. Banks may use haircut numbers calculated according to shorter holding periods, scaled up to the appropriate holding period by the square root of time formula.
158. Banks must take into account the illiquidity of lower-quality assets. The holding period should be adjusted upwards in cases where such a holding period would be inappropriate given the liquidity of the collateral. They should also identify where historical data may understate potential volatility, e.g. a pegged currency. Such cases must be dealt with by subjecting the data to stress testing.
159. The choice of historical observation period (sample period) for calculating haircuts shall be a minimum of one year. For banks that use a weighting scheme or other methods for the historical observation period, the “effective” observation period must be at least one year
(that is, the weighted average time lag of the individual observations cannot be less than
6 months).
160. Banks should update their data sets no less frequently than once every three months and should also reassess them whenever market prices are subject to material changes. This implies that haircuts must be computed at least every three months. The supervisor may also require a bank to calculate its haircuts using a shorter observation period if, in the supervisor's judgement, this is justified by a significant upsurge in price volatility.
161. No particular type of model is prescribed. So long as each model used captures all the material risks run by the bank, banks will be free to use models based on, for example, historical simulations and Monte Carlo simulations.
Qualitative criteria
162. The estimated volatility data (and holding period) must be used in the day-to-day risk management process of the bank.
163. Banks should have robust processes in place for ensuring compliance with a documented set of internal policies, controls and procedures concerning the operation of the risk measurement system.
164. The risk measurement system should be used in conjunction with internal exposure limits.
165. An independent review of the risk measurement system should be carried out regularly in the bank’s own internal auditing process. A review of the overall risk management process should take place at regular intervals (ideally not less than once a year) and should specifically address, at a minimum:
w the integration of risk measures into daily risk management;
w the validation of any significant change in the risk measurement process;
w the accuracy and completeness of position data;
w the verification of the consistency, timeliness and reliability of data sources used to run internal models, including the independence of such data sources; and
w the accuracy and appropriateness of volatility assumptions.
Adjustment for different holding periods and non daily mark-to-market or remargining
166. For some transactions, depending on the nature and frequency of the revaluation and remargining provisions, different holding periods are appropriate. The framework for collateral haircuts distinguishes between repo-style transactions (i.e. repo/reverse repos and securities lending/borrowing), “other capital-market-driven transactions” (i.e. OTC derivatives transactions and margin lending) and secured lending. In capital-market-driven transactions and repo-style transactions, the documentation contains remargining clauses; in secured lending transactions, it generally does not.
167. The minimum holding period for various products is summarised in the following table.
Transaction type Minimum holding Condition
period
______________________________________________________________________________
Repo-style transaction five business days daily remargining
______________________________________________________________________________
Other capital market transactions ten business days daily remargining
______________________________________________________________________________
Secured lending twenty business days daily revaluation
______________________________________________________________________________
168. When the frequency of remargining or revaluation is longer than the minimum, the minimum haircut numbers will be scaled up depending on the actual number of business days between remargining or revaluation using the square root of time formula below:
H H? M R M( -1)N T MT
where:
H = haircut
HM = haircut under the minimum holding period
TM = minimum holding period for the type of transaction
NR = actual number of business days between remargining for capital market transactions or revaluation for secured transactions.
When a bank calculates the volatility on a TN day holding period which is different from the specified minimum holding period TM, the HM will be calculated using the square root of time formula:
TM M ? NH H TN
TN = holding period used by the bank for deriving HN
HN = haircut based on the holding period TN
169. For example, for banks using the standard supervisory haircuts, the 10-business day haircuts provided in paragraph 151 will be the basis and this haircut will be scaled up or down depending on the type of transaction and the frequency of remargining or revaluation using the formula below:
H H 10 R 1MN T) 10
where:
H = haircut
H10 = 10-business day standard supervisory haircut for instrument
NR = actual number of business days between remargining for capital market transactions or revaluation for secured transactions.
TM = minimum holding period for the type of transaction
Conditions for zero H
170. For repo-style transactions where the following conditions are satisfied, and the counterparty is a core market participant, supervisors may choose not to apply the haircuts specified in the comprehensive approach and may instead apply a haircut of zero. This carve-out will not be available for banks using the modelling approaches as described in paragraphs 178 to 181 (i).
(a) Both the exposure and the collateral are cash or a sovereign security or PSE
security qualifying for a 0% risk weight in the standardised approach; 49
(b) Both the exposure and the collateral are denominated in the same currency;
(c) Either the transaction is overnight or both the exposure and the collateral are marked-to-market daily and are subject to daily remargining;
(d) Following a counterparty’s failure to remargin, the time that is required between the last mark-to-market before the failure to remargin and the liquidation 50 of the collateral is considered to be no more than four business days;
(e) The transaction is settled across a settlement system proven for that type of transaction;
(f) The documentation covering the agreement is standard market documentation for repo-style transactions in the securities concerned;
(g) The transaction is governed by documentation specifying that if the counterparty fails to satisfy an obligation to deliver cash or securities or to deliver margin or otherwise defaults, then the transaction is immediately terminable; and
(h) Upon any default event, regardless of whether the counterparty is insolvent or bankrupt, the bank has the unfettered, legally enforceable right to immediately seize and liquidate the collateral for its benefit.
171. Core market participants may include, at the discretion of the national supervisor, the following entities:
(a) Sovereigns, central banks and PSEs;
(b) Banks and securities firms;
(c) Other financial companies (including insurance companies) eligible for a 20% risk weight in the standardised approach;
(d) Regulated mutual funds that are subject to capital or leverage requirements;
(e) Regulated pension funds; and
(f) Recognised clearing organisations.
172. Where a supervisor applies a specific carve-out to repo-style transactions in securities issued by its domestic government, then other supervisors may choose to allow banks incorporated in their jurisdiction to adopt the same approach to the same transactions.
Treatment of repo-style transactions covered under master netting agreements
173. The effects of bilateral netting agreements covering repo-style transactions will be recognised on a counterparty-by-counterparty basis if the agreements are legally enforceable in each relevant jurisdiction upon the occurrence of an event of default and regardless of whether the counterparty is insolvent or bankrupt. In addition, netting agreements must:
(a) provide the non-defaulting party the right to terminate and close-out in a timely manner all transactions under the agreement upon an event of default, including in the event of insolvency or bankruptcy of the counterparty;
(b) provide for the netting of gains and losses on transactions (including the value of any collateral) terminated and closed out under it so that a single net amount is owed by one party to the other;
(c) allow for the prompt liquidation or setoff of collateral upon the event of default; and
(d) be, together with the rights arising from the provisions required in (a) to (c) above, legally enforceable in each relevant jurisdiction upon the occurrence of an event of default and regardless of the counterparty's insolvency or bankruptcy.
174. Netting across positions in the banking and trading book will only be recognised when the netted transactions fulfil the following conditions:
(a) All transactions are marked to market daily; 51 and
(b) The collateral instruments used in the transactions are recognised as eligible financial collateral in the banking book.
175. The formula in paragraph 147 will be adapted to calculate the capital requirements for transactions with netting agreements.
176. For banks using the standard supervisory haircuts or own-estimate haircuts, the framework below will apply to take into account the impact of master netting agreements.
E* = max {0, [(?(E) – ?(C)) + ? (Es x Hs) +? (Efx x Hfx)]} 52
where:
E* = the exposure value after risk mitigation
E = current value of the exposure
C = the value of the collateral received
Es = absolute value of the net position in a given security
Hs = haircut appropriate to Es
Efx = absolute value of the net position in a currency different from the settlement currency
Hfx = haircut appropriate for currency mismatch
177. The intention here is to obtain a net exposure amount after netting of the exposures and collateral and have an add-on amount reflecting possible price changes for the securities involved in the transactions and for foreign exchange risk if any. The net long or short position of each security included in the netting agreement will be multiplied by the appropriate haircut. All other rules regarding the calculation of haircuts stated in paragraphs
147 to 172 equivalently apply for banks using bilateral netting agreements for repo-style transactions.
Use of models
178. As an alternative to the use of standard or own-estimate haircuts, banks may be permitted to use a VaR models approach to reflect the price volatility of the exposure and collateral for repo-style transactions, taking into account correlation effects between security positions. This approach would apply to repo-style transactions covered by bilateral netting agreements on a counterparty-by-counterparty basis. At the discretion of the national supervisor, firms are also eligible to use the VaR model approach for margin lending transactions, if the transactions are covered under a bilateral master netting agreement that meets the requirements of paragraphs 173 and 174. The VaR models approach is available to banks that have received supervisory recognition for an internal market risk model under the Market Risk Amendment. Banks which have not received supervisory recognition for use of models under the Market Risk Amendment can separately apply for supervisory recognition to use their internal VaR models for calculation of potential price volatility for repo-style transactions. Internal models will only be accepted when a bank can prove the quality of its model to the supervisor through the backtesting of its output using one year of historical data. Banks must meet the model validation requirement of paragraph 43 of Annex
4 to use VaR for repo-style and other SFTs. In addition, other transactions similar to repo- style transactions (like prime brokerage) and that meet the requirements for repo-style transactions, are also eligible to use the VaR models approach provided the model used meets the operational requirements set forth in Section I.F of Annex 4.
179. The quantitative and qualitative criteria for recognition of internal market risk models for repo-style transactions and other similar transactions are in principle the same as under the Market Risk Amendment. With regard to the holding period, the minimum will be 5- business days for repo-style transactions, rather than the 10-business days under the Market Risk Amendment. For other transactions eligible for the VaR models approach, the 10- business day holding period will be retained. The minimum holding period should be adjusted upwards for market instruments where such a holding period would be inappropriate given the liquidity of the instrument concerned.
180. (Deleted)
181. The calculation of the exposure E* for banks using their internal model will be the following:
E* = max {0, [(?E – ?C) + VaR output from internal model]}
In calculating capital requirements banks will use the previous business day’s VaR number.
181 (i). Subject to supervisory approval, instead of using the VaR approach, banks may also calculate an expected positive exposure for repo-style and other similar SFTs, in accordance with the Internal Model Method set out in Annex 4 of this Framework.
(iii) The simple approach
Minimum conditions
182. For collateral to be recognised in the simple approach, the collateral must be pledged for at least the life of the exposure and it must be marked to market and revalued with a minimum frequency of six months. Those portions of claims collateralised by the market value of recognised collateral receive the risk weight applicable to the collateral instrument. The risk weight on the collateralised portion will be subject to a floor of 20% except under the conditions specified in paragraphs 183 to 185. The remainder of the claim should be assigned to the risk weight appropriate to the counterparty. A capital requirement will be applied to banks on either side of the collateralised transaction: for example, both repos and reverse repos will be subject to capital requirements.
Exceptions to the risk weight floor
183. Transactions which fulfil the criteria outlined in paragraph 170 and are with a core market participant, as defined in 171, receive a risk weight of 0%. If the counterparty to the transactions is not a core market participant the transaction should receive a risk weight of
10%.
184. OTC derivative transactions subject to daily mark-to-market, collateralised by cash and where there is no currency mismatch should receive a 0% risk weight. Such transactions collateralised by sovereign or PSE securities qualifying for a 0% risk weight in the standardised approach can receive a 10% risk weight.
185. The 20% floor for the risk weight on a collateralised transaction will not be applied and a 0% risk weight can be applied where the exposure and the collateral are denominated in the same currency, and either:
w the collateral is cash on deposit as defined in paragraph 145 (a); or
w the collateral is in the form of sovereign/PSE securities eligible for a 0% risk weight, and its market value has been discounted by 20%.
(iv) Collateralised OTC derivatives transactions
186. Under the Current Exposure Method, the calculation of the counterparty credit risk charge for an individual contract will be as follows:
counterparty charge = [(RC + add-on) – CA] x r x 8%
where:
RC = the replacement cost,
add-on = the amount for potential future exposure calculated under the 1988
Accord,
CA = the volatility adjusted collateral amount under the comprehensive approach prescribed in paragraphs 147 to 172, or zero if no eligible collateral is applied to the transaction, and
r = the risk weight of the counterparty.
187. When effective bilateral netting contracts are in place, RC will be the net replacement cost and the add-on will be ANet as calculated under the 1988 Accord. The haircut for currency risk (Hfx) should be applied when there is a mismatch between the collateral currency and the settlement currency. Even in the case where there are more than two currencies involved in the exposure, collateral and settlement currency, a single haircut assuming a 10-business day holding period scaled up as necessary depending on the frequency of mark-to-market will be applied.
187 (i). As an alternative to the Current Exposure Method for the calculation of the counterparty credit risk charge, banks may also use the Standardised Method and, subject to supervisory approval, the Internal Model Method as set out in Annex 4 of this Framework.
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
