Swiss and UK banks set to win as Japanese lose in Basel II
Swiss and UK banks are poised to be the main beneficiaries of the proposed new regulatory capital Accord, Basel II, according to results from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s quantitative impact study 2.5 (QIS2.5).
UK and Swiss institutions benefit from more favourable treatment given to their relatively large retail portfolios; while the high probability of default on large Japanese corporate loans has had a negative impact on Japanese capital requirements.
The QIS2.5 results are classed as confidential by the Basel Committee, which has been reluctant to publicly release international banking comparison statistics. The results were based on proposed changes to the credit risk calibration curve set out in a Basel paper on November 5. They are only part of ongoing impact studies, with a fourth survey, QIS3, set to be sent to banks in the New Year. This study will include data for the standardised and advanced internal ratings-based approaches for credit risk, along with advanced, foundation and standardised approaches for market and operational risk.
The results from the 2.5 study were more favourable for all financial institutions in all countries, compared with a previous study, QIS2, which used a steeper risk-weighting curve, sparking banker condemnation.Risk
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Risk management
Appetite breaches climb for top op risks
Risk Benchmarking: Low tolerance and heightened threat environment combine to test banks’ limits for cyber, resilience, third-party risk
How gatecrashers could spoil the tokenisation party
Blockchain can curb settlement risks, but that could come at the expense of new third-party risks
Op Risk Benchmarking: Banks seek a home for AI risk
Risk.net’s 2026 study sees record participation and collective unease, as banks race to incorporate AI into op risk frameworks
Contract negotiation tops tech sovereignty for banks in Asia
Regulatory pressure is rising, but industry still focused on service agreements with third parties
The SaaSpocalypse shows private markets need risk models
Investors have little idea how bad the losses in private credit are going to be
Crisis? Which crisis? How ECB stress test failed to see Strait
Banks were told to design geopolitical shock scenarios, but some focused mainly on tariffs
The race to model private market risks
BlackRock maps holdings to risk factors; competitors aim to get the best from statistical methods
G-Sib capital surcharge: how indexing and averaging alter incentives
Capital risk strategist anticipates Basel III endgame impact on US big-bank behaviour