EBA欧洲银行-CP10rev_158页_1mb

Guidelines on the Implementation, Validation and Assessment of AMA and IRB Approaches

Executive Summary

These guidelines provide a common understanding among European supervisory authorities on the procedures for processing, assessing, and approving the use of Advanced Measurement (AMA) and Internal Ratings Based (IRB) approaches for regulatory capital calculations under the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD). They elaborate on the meaning and implementation of the minimum requirements for these approaches and are based on supervisory experience and expectations as of early 2006.

The CRD mandates an explicit approval process for institutions wishing to use AMA or IRB approaches. Approval for IRB requires that the institution's credit risk management and rating systems are sound and meet the requirements of Article 84 and Annex VII, Part 4. For AMA, the systems must meet the criteria in Annex X, Part 3. The guidelines aim to ensure consistency across EU member states and reduce implementation burdens for institutions.

The guidelines are not comprehensive but offer a framework for supervisors to assess applications and conduct ongoing reviews. They include topics such as the definition of loss and default, rating methodologies, data quality, validation processes, and internal governance. They also address the use of internal documentation, external vendor models, and the application of risk transfer mechanisms in AMA.

The guidelines do not cover IT architecture, contingency plans, or physical security in detail, as these are considered beyond the scope of capital calculation. However, they do reference basic principles that supervisors may consider as part of their broader evaluation of an institution's control structure.

The guidelines include a transition period and allow for a further month of consultation on specific sections related to securitisation, equities, and AMA quantitative aspects. They are subject to review and maintenance following CRD implementation.

Core Content

1. Introduction

• Purpose: To provide a common framework for the implementation, validation, and assessment of AMA and IRB approaches.
• Scope: Applies to all institutions, including credit institutions and investment firms, and covers both credit and operational risk.
• Not Covered: Does not address IT systems architecture, contingency plans, or physical security in detail.
• Consultation: The guidelines were subject to a three-month public consultation and may undergo further review and maintenance.

2. Cooperation Procedures, Approval and Post-Approval Process

• Article 129 Cooperation: Supervisors must cooperate to determine approval for groups using internal models for both consolidated and solo requirements.
• Pre-Application Process: Groups may engage in exploratory discussions with consolidating or host supervisors, and these discussions should be communicated to relevant parties.
• Approval Process: A formal consultative process is required, with a six-month timeframe for decision-making.
• Post-Approval Process: Includes ongoing monitoring, review, and possible changes in the supervisory authority.

3. Supervisor's Assessment of IRB Applications

• Roll-Out and Partial Use: Institutions may roll out or use IRB approaches partially, depending on their capabilities and the complexity of their operations.
• Use Test: Ensures that the institution’s systems are appropriate and fit for purpose.
• Methodology and Documentation:
  • Exposure Classes: Includes retail, corporate, securitisation, and equity exposures.
  • Rating Systems: Must be robust and internally consistent.
  • Risk Parameters: PD, LGD, and Conversion Factors (CF) are key components and must be accurately estimated and validated.
• Data Requirements: Emphasises data accuracy, completeness, and representativeness for model development and validation.
• Validation: Involves both quantitative (e.g., benchmarking, backtesting) and qualitative assessments.
• Internal Governance:
  • Role of management and senior management.
  • Establishment of an Independent Credit Risk Control unit.
  • Role of internal audit.
  • Independence in rating assignment and conflict of interests.
  • Reliance on external auditors in the review process.

4. Supervisor's Assessment of AMA Applications

• Operational Risk Measurement: Focuses on the AMA, including the use of internal models and the validation of these models.
• Simpler Approaches: Includes guidance on the Basic Indicator Approach (BIA) and the Standardised Approach (TSA).
• Use Test for AMA: Ensures the institution meets the qualifying criteria.
• Data Quality: Emphasises the importance of accurate and consistent data for model development.
• Validation: Involves benchmarking, backtesting, and handling low default portfolios.
• Risk Transfer Mechanisms: Includes insurance and other mechanisms, though guidance on these is limited at the time.
• Internal Governance: Similar to IRB, but with specific focus on AMA.
• Allocation Methodology: Guidelines on how AMA capital requirements should be allocated on a group-wide basis.

Key Points

• Common Understanding: The guidelines reflect a shared understanding among European supervisory authorities.
• Flexibility: Institutions may use alternative solutions that meet or exceed supervisory requirements unless national authorities specify otherwise.
• Proportionality: Supervisors should apply the principle of proportionality when assessing compliance, considering the nature, size, and complexity of the institution.
• Transition Period: The guidelines include a transition period for institutions to adapt their systems and processes.
• Consultation: The guidelines were open to further consultation on specific sections, including those related to securitisation, equities, and AMA quantitative aspects.

Summary of Minimum Requirements

• Application Content: Must include a clear description of the approach, methodology, data, and validation procedures.
• Language and Signatories: Applications must be in the official language of the competent authority and signed by the institution.
• Six-Month Period: The approval process must be completed within six months of the submission of a complete application.
• Supervisor's Role: Supervisors must assess the application against the minimum requirements, including the quality of internal documentation and the use of external vendor models.
• Data Standards: Data must be accurate, complete, and consistent with accounting data.
• Validation Tools: Includes benchmarking, backtesting, and specific handling of low default portfolios.
• Internal Governance: Requires a structured governance framework, including independent units and audit oversight.

Conclusion

These guidelines are designed to support national supervisors in the consistent and effective implementation of AMA and IRB approaches under the CRD. They provide a detailed framework for the approval, assessment, and ongoing supervision of these advanced risk measurement methods, while allowing for flexibility and future evolution based on industry feedback and regulatory developments.