EBA欧洲银行-FAQs-on-EU-wide-stress-test_3页_228kb

2014 EU-wide Stress Test Summary

Core Content

The 2014 EU-wide stress test was a comprehensive exercise aimed at assessing the resilience of EU banks against potential economic shocks. It was conducted in collaboration between the European Banking Authority (EBA) and National Competent Authorities (NCAs), including the European Central Bank (ECB) for Eurozone banks. The test focused on capital adequacy, risk exposure, and profitability under both baseline and adverse scenarios, with results published on 26 October 2014.

Key Information

• Data Published: The EBA released up to 12,000 data points per bank, totaling over 1 million data points. This included information on capital composition, risk-weighted assets (RWAs), profit and loss (P&L), sovereign exposures, credit risk, and securitisation.
• Capital Ratios: For the first time, the EBA disclosed fully loaded Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital ratios under both baseline and adverse scenarios at the end of the exercise (2016).
• Data Format: The EBA provided various formats, including:
  • Aggregate summary reports
  • Interactive map tools by country and bank
  • Bank-by-bank results in EBA disclosure templates
  • Interactive Excel tools for aggregate and bank-level data
  • Downloadable CSV database and data model
• National Competent Authorities: NCAs, including the ECB, published results for their jurisdictions in the same format. They also handled quality assurance and additional sensitivities, while the EBA acted as the data hub for final results.
• Sample Selection: The EBA tested 123 banks, representing at least 50% of the total consolidated assets in each EU Member State and Norway. This differs from the ECB’s comprehensive assessment, which included 130 banks, 103 of which were part of the EU-wide exercise. Banks from non-EU countries were excluded, while those from non-Eurozone EU countries were included.
• Adverse Scenario: The EBA developed a consistent and relevant adverse scenario across the EU to reflect systemic risks. While it cannot capture all possible risks, it provides insight into banks' sensitivity to macroeconomic shocks.
• Liquidity Risk: Liquidity risk was not included in this stress test due to the three-year time horizon being unsuitable for liquidity analysis.
• Banco Espirito Santo/Novo Banco: The stress test for Novo Banco was postponed following its creation through the resolution of Banco Espirito Santo. The timing will be confirmed by the ECB and Portuguese authorities.

Main Views and Findings

• Transparency and Comparability: The EBA ensured transparency by disclosing detailed capital components and fully transitioned CET1 ratios, despite the legal framework allowing for national discretion in capital definitions. This helps maintain comparability and a level playing field.
• Quality Assurance: Competent authorities, including the ECB, were responsible for verifying the data quality submitted by banks. The EBA provided standardized methodologies, data definitions, and templates to support this process.
• Supervisory Reaction: Banks that failed to meet the 5.5% CET1 capital requirement under the adverse scenario were required to submit recovery plans to their competent authorities. These authorities assessed the plans and ensured their implementation.
• Credibility Restoration: The stress test aimed to restore investor confidence by demonstrating that EU banks are well-capitalised and capable of fulfilling their role in supporting economic recovery after previous recapitalisation efforts and asset quality reviews (AQRs).

Next Steps and Future Outlook

• Supervisory Actions: Competent authorities will oversee the implementation of recovery plans and ensure that banks address identified vulnerabilities.
• Frequency of Stress Tests: The EBA will continue to conduct regular stress tests based on market developments and regulatory requirements, without specifying a fixed frequency.
• Focus on Capital: The current stress test prioritised capital adequacy, with a focus on credit and market risks. Future approaches may evolve depending on economic conditions and regulatory needs.

Conclusion

The 2014 EU-wide stress test was a significant step in enhancing transparency, ensuring data quality, and assessing the resilience of the EU banking system. It provided valuable insights into banks' capital positions and risk profiles, supporting regulatory oversight and investor confidence.