EBA欧洲银行-DE_529900GM944JT8YIRL63_16页_3mb

Summary of 2014 EU-wide Stress Test for DE - Münchener Hypothekenbank eG

Core Information

• Bank Name: DE - Münchener Hypothekenbank eG
• LEI Code: 529900GM944JT8YIRL63
• Country: Austria
• Test Period: 2014 EU-wide Stress Test

Actual Figures as of 31 December 2013

Outcome of the Adverse Scenario as of 31 December 2016

Memorandum Items

Outcome of the Baseline Scenario as of 31 December 2016

Memorandum Items for Baseline Scenario

Risk Exposure Breakdown (Baseline and Adverse Scenarios)

Baseline Scenario

Adverse Scenario

Key Observations

• Common Equity Tier 1 Capital: The bank's CET1 capital decreased significantly from 532 mIn EUR in 2013 to 262 mln EUR in 2016 under the adverse scenario, resulting in a CET1 ratio of 2.9%, which is below the EU threshold of 5.5%.
• Impairment Losses: Impairment losses increased from 13 mIn EUR in 2013 to 261 mln EUR in 2016 under the adverse scenario, indicating a substantial deterioration in asset quality.
• Operating Profit: The cumulative operating profit before impairments dropped from 70 mIn EUR in 2013 to 95 mln EUR in 2016 under the adverse scenario, suggesting a decline in profitability.
• Risk Exposure: Total risk exposure rose from 7,730 mIn EUR in 2013 to 8,907 mln EUR in 2016 under the adverse scenario, showing a rise in overall risk.
• Baseline Scenario: The bank performed better under the baseline scenario, with a CET1 ratio of 5.8% in 2016, which is above the 5.5% threshold but still below the 8.0% target.
• No Mandatory Conversions or Eligible Instruments: There were no instruments with mandatory conversion into ordinary shares or eligible instruments that could convert into CET1 or be written down during the 2014–2016 period.

Conclusion

The 2014 EU-wide Stress Test revealed that DE - Münchener Hypothekenbank eG faced significant challenges under the adverse scenario, with a decline in CET1 capital and an increase in impairment losses and risk exposure. While the baseline scenario showed a more stable performance, the bank still fell short of the higher CET1 threshold. The results highlight the importance of risk management and capital adequacy under adverse economic conditions.