EBA欧洲银行-Presenter_1_Margherita-Giuzio_24页_727kb

Summary of "The Effect of Possible EU Diversification Requirements on the Risk of Banks' Sovereign Bond Portfolios"

Core Content

This document examines the potential impact of EU diversification requirements on the risk of banks' sovereign bond portfolios. It analyzes current risk and diversification levels, evaluates the effects of proposed regulatory changes, and investigates how diversification might influence tail risk and portfolio performance during financial crises.

Main Points

1. Current Risk and Diversification of Sovereign Bond Portfolios

• Data Source: EBA stress test and transparency exercise data.
• Key Finding: Banks exhibit low levels of diversification in their sovereign bond holdings.
• Home Bias: The risk of banks' sovereign bond portfolios is heavily influenced by the risk of their home country.
• Diversification Measures:
  • $D_w$ (diversification of weights): Lower for most countries compared to benchmarks.
  • $D_r$ (diversification of risk contributions): Even lower, indicating high concentration in risk.
• EU Aggregated Portfolio: More diversified and less risky than individual country portfolios.

2. Regulatory Context

• Current Treatment:
  • Sovereign bonds are subject to zero capital requirements in the Standardized Approach (SA).
  • Banks using IRB can use SA for sovereign exposures.
  • Exempt from the Large Exposures Regime, allowing exposures up to 25% of eligible capital.
• Proposed Changes:
  • Introduce capital requirements proportional to credit risk.
  • Implement limits on large sovereign bond exposures to reduce home bias and systemic risk.
• Regulatory Intent:
  • To weaken the "Doom Loop" between banks and sovereigns.
  • To reduce home bias and systemic risk, supporting the European Deposit Insurance Scheme.

3. Impact of Diversification Requirements

• Rebalancing Assumption: Banks adjust their portfolios to match the risk-return profile without changing total size.
• Diversification Levels:
  • Higher diversification is achieved with rebalancing.
  • However, portfolio variance increases, except for Portugal.
• Tail Risk Consideration:
  • Rebalancing may not reduce tail risk; in fact, it could increase it during crises due to high correlation between sovereign bonds.
• Efficiency of Diversification:
  • Diversification at the national level may not effectively reduce risk in the context of EU-wide sovereign portfolios.
  • Overlapping portfolios can act as a contagion channel during financial distress.

Key Information

4. Portfolio Statistics

5. Tail Risk and VaR Analysis

• Scenario Approach: Used to estimate VaR bounds under different dependence structures.
• Assumptions:
  • Sovereign bond returns follow a multivariate t-Student distribution.
  • Model risk is accounted for by assigning probabilities to the trusted region of the data.
• VaR Bounds:
  • Rebalancing increases diversification but may not reduce tail risk, especially during crises.
  • During the European sovereign debt crisis, tail risk for rebalanced portfolios may be higher due to increased correlation.

Conclusion

• Diversification Challenges: Despite regulatory efforts to increase diversification, the benefits in terms of risk reduction are uncertain.
• Potential Costs: Rebalancing could be costly for banks, yet the risk mitigation effect is not guaranteed.
• Policy Implications: The document suggests that diversification at the national level may not be sufficient to reduce systemic risk in the EU context, and that dependence structures among sovereigns must be carefully considered in any regulatory reform.

References

• Acharya, V.V., & Steffen, S. (2015). The "greatest" carry trade ever? Understanding eurozone bank crisis.
• Aït-Sahalia, Y., Laeven, R.J.A., & Pelizzon, L. (2014). Mutual excitation in eurozone sovereign CDS.
• Arnold, M. (2016). Sovereign debt rule changes threaten EU bank finances.
• Battistini, N., Pagano, M., & Simonelli, S. (2014). Systemic risk, sovereign yields and bank exposures in the euro crisis.
• Bernard, C., & Vanduffel, S. (2015). A new approach to assess model risk in high dimensions.
• Buch, C., Koetter, M., & Ohls, J. (2013). Banks and sovereign risk: A granular view.
• Embrechts, P., Puccetti, G., & Rischerndorf, L. (2013). Model uncertainty and VaR aggregation.
• Erce, A. (2015). Bank and sovereign risk feedback loops.
• ESRB. (2015). Report on the regulatory treatment of sovereign exposures.
• Fabozzi, F.J., Giacometti, R., & Tsuchida, N. (2015). The ICA-based factor decomposition of the Eurozone sovereign CDS spreads.
• Gennaioli, N., Martin, A., & Rossi, S. (2014). Banks, government bonds, and default: What do the data say?
• Juncker, J.C., Tusk, D., Dijsselbom, J., Draghi, M., & Schulz, M. (2015). Completing Europe's economic and monetary union.
• Lenarcic, A., Mevis, D., & Siklos, D. (2016). Tackling sovereign risk in European banks.
• Uhlig, H. (2013). Sovereign default risk and banks in a monetary union.