FVA – what's wrong, and how to fix it

Albanese and Andersen elaborate on controversial Risk article

A capital idea: inclusion of capital as a funding source can shrink reported costs

It proved controversial when we wrote – in the February issue of Risk – that the most common way of calculating funding valuation adjustment (FVA) could lead to exaggerated writeoffs of net income. That was no surprise, given the industry had collectively taken losses in the multiple billions of dollars during 2013 and 2014.


In response to comments we received about the article, we want to elaborate on the standard funding cost adjustment/funding benefit

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 copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

If you already have an account, please sign in here.


Want to know what’s included in our free membership? Click here

This address will be used to create your account

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here