EBA欧洲银行-IT_F1T87K3OQ2OV1UORLH26_16页_3mb
报告摘要
2014 EU-wide Stress Test Summary for IT - Banca Carige S.P.A. - Cassa di Risparmio di Genova e Imperia
Core Information
- Bank Name: IT - Banca Carige S.P.A. - Cassa di Risparmio di Genova e Imperia
- LEI Code: F1T87K3OQ2OV1UORLH26
- Stress Test Period: 2014 EU-wide Stress Test
- Reporting Date: 31 December 2013
- Test Outcome Date: 31 December 2016
Key Financial Metrics
Actual Figures (as of 31 December 2013)
- Operating profit before impairments: 208 million EUR
- Impairment losses on financial and non-financial assets in the banking book: 3,141 million EUR
- Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital: 898 million EUR
- Total Risk Exposure: 22,989 million EUR
- CET1 ratio: 3.9%
Baseline Scenario (as of 31 December 2016)
- 3-year cumulative operating profit before impairments: 492 million EUR
- 3-year cumulative impairment losses on financial and non-financial assets in the banking book: 959 million EUR
- 3-year cumulative losses from the stress in the trading book: 31 million EUR
- CET1 capital: 547 million EUR
- Total Risk Exposure: 23,346 million EUR
- CET1 ratio: 2.3%
Adverse Scenario (as of 31 December 2016)
- 3-year cumulative operating profit before impairments: 167 million EUR
- 3-year cumulative impairment losses on financial and non-financial assets in the banking book: 1,922 million EUR
- 3-year cumulative losses from the stress in the trading book: 66 million EUR
- Valuation losses due to sovereign shock after tax and prudential filters: 97 million EUR
- CET1 capital: -551 million EUR
- Total Risk Exposure: 23,337 million EUR
- CET1 ratio: -2.4%
Memorandum Items
Common EU-wide CET1 Threshold
- Baseline Scenario: 1,868 million EUR (8.0%)
- Adverse Scenario: 1,284 million EUR (5.5%)
Mandatory Conversion of Instruments
- Baseline Scenario: 0 million EUR
- Adverse Scenario: 0 million EUR
Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 Instruments
- Baseline Scenario: 0 million EUR
- Adverse Scenario: 0 million EUR
Risk Exposure and Value Adjustments
Baseline Scenario (as of 31 December 2013)
| Category | LTV % | Exposure (F-IRB) | Exposure (A-IRB) | Exposure (STA) | Risk Exposure (F-IRB) | Risk Exposure (A-IRB) | Risk Exposure (STA) | Value Adjustments (F-IRB) | Value Adjustments (A-IRB) | Value Adjustments (STA) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Central banks and central governments | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6,899 | 0 | 0 | 130 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Institutions | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2,815 | 0 | 0 | 1,287 | 0 | 0 | 12 |
| Corporates | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9,599 | 0 | 0 | 8,401 | 0 | 0 | 137 |
| Corporates - Of Which: SME | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5,589 | 0 | 0 | 4,646 | 0 | 0 | 85 |
| Retail | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8,798 | 0 | 0 | 3,875 | 0 | 0 | 56 |
| Retail - Secured on real estate property | 50.0% | 0 | 0 | 6,349 | 0 | 0 | 2,297 | 0 | 0 | 13 |
| Retail - Secured on real estate property - Of Which: SME | 52.0% | 0 | 0 | 1,107 | 0 | 0 | 454 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| Retail - Secured on real estate property - Of Which: non-SME | 40.4% | 0 | 0 | 5,243 | 0 | 0 | 1,842 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Retail - Qualifying Revolving | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Retail - Other Retail | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2,435 | 0 | 0 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 44 |
| Retail - Other Retail - Of Which: SME | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1,464 | 0 | 0 | 836 | 0 | 0 | 23 |
| Retail - Other Retail - Of Which: non-SME | 0 | 0 | 0 | 971 | 0 | 0 | 733 | 0 | 0 | 21 |
| Equity | 0 | 0 | 0 | 451 | 0 | 0 | 455 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Securitisation | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other non-credit obligation assets | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3,289 | 0 | 0 | 2,691 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TOTAL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31,870 | 0 | 0 | 16,852 | 0 | 0 | 207 |
Adverse Scenario (as of 31 December 2013)
| Category | LTV % | Exposure (F-IRB) | Exposure (A-IRB) | Exposure (STA) | Risk Exposure (F-IRB) | Risk Exposure (A-IRB) | Risk Exposure (STA) | Value Adjustments (F-IRB) | Value Adjustments (A-IRB) | Value Adjustments (STA) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Central banks and central governments | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6,598 | 0 | 0 | 130 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Institutions | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2,048 | 0 | 0 | 1,287 | 0 | 0 | 12 |
| Corporates | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9,464 | 0 | 0 | 8,401 | 0 | 0 | 137 |
| Corporates - Of Which: SME | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5,505 | 0 | 0 | 4,646 | 0 | 0 | 85 |
| Retail | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8,771 | 0 | 0 | 3,875 | 0 | 0 | 56 |
| Retail - Secured on real estate property | 50.0% | 0 | 0 | 6,327 | 0 | 0 | 2,297 | 0 | 0 | 13 |
| Retail - Secured on real estate property - Of Which: SME | 52.0% | 0 | 0 | 1,107 | 0 | 0 | 454 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| Retail - Secured on real estate property - Of Which: non-SME | 40.4% | 0 | 0 | 5,220 | 0 | 0 | 1,842 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Retail - Qualifying Revolving | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Retail - Other Retail | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2,431 | 0 | 0 | 1,568 | 0 | 0 | 44 |
| Retail - Other Retail - Of Which: SME | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1,463 | 0 | 0 | 836 | 0 | 0 | 23 |
| Retail - Other Retail - Of Which: non-SME | 0 | 0 | 0 | 968 | 0 | 0 | 733 | 0 | 0 | 21 |
| Equity | 0 | 0 | 0 | 394 | 0 | 0 | 455 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Securitisation | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other non-credit obligation assets | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3,287 | 0 | 0 | 2,691 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| TOTAL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30,581 | 0 | 0 | 16,852 | 0 | 0 | 207 |
Summary of Key Observations
- CET1 Capital: In the baseline scenario, CET1 capital increased from 898 million EUR to 547 million EUR, while in the adverse scenario, it decreased to -551 million EUR, indicating a significant capital erosion under adverse conditions.
- CET1 Ratio: The CET1 ratio dropped from 3.9% to 2.3% in the baseline scenario and further to -2.4% in the adverse scenario, showing a decline in capital adequacy.
- Impairment Losses: Under the baseline scenario, impairment losses on financial and non-financial assets in the banking book decreased over time, whereas in the adverse scenario, they increased significantly, affecting the bank's profitability.
- Risk Exposure: The total risk exposure increased slightly in both scenarios, with a more pronounced effect in the adverse scenario.
- Sovereign Shock: The adverse scenario included valuation losses due to sovereign shock, which negatively impacted the CET1 ratio.
- Value Adjustments and Provisions: The value adjustments and provisions increased in the adverse scenario, contributing to the decline in CET1 capital.
Conclusion
The 2014 EU-wide Stress Test highlights the vulnerability of Banca Carige S.P.A. under adverse conditions. While the baseline scenario showed a more stable performance with some recovery in CET1 capital, the adverse scenario revealed a significant deterioration in financial health, with a negative CET1 capital and a severely reduced CET1 ratio. The test underscores the importance of robust risk management and capital planning in the banking sector.
展开完整摘要
试读结束,高清完整版pdf/doc/ppt,请点下载