
In EU stress tests, everyone’s a loser
European Union-wide stress tests deserve a 'Could do better'
Imagine an exam that can’t be failed, is designed to give some participants an easier ride, and doesn’t even include the whole class. Sounds like a waste of time, right? And yet the European Union-wide stress tests, the results of which were published on November 2, followed this exact blueprint.
Forty-eight banks participated, representing 70% of EU banking sector assets. But no lenders from the economically embattled nations of Cyprus, Greece, and Portugal featured. Nor did some of the most beleaguered banks of other nations, such as Italy’s Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena.
No sanctions were applied to banks that didn’t perform well – partly because there was no pass/fail threshold. In fact, the way the European Banking Authority tells it, the tests were designed to help the examiners more than the examinees, by serving as an “important source of information” for the framing of supervisory review processes and Pillar 2 capital add-ons.
Yet by digging into the data, it’s easy to learn which banks are top of the class and which are due a big, red ‘F’.
Though no bank’s core capital breached regulatory minimums over the three-year stress period, UK banks Lloyds and Barclays, along with Italian lender Banco BPM, came closest. They would have performed worse, too, if not for transitional measures that reduced the capital-sapping effect of new accounting methodology IFRS 9, which came into force at the start of this year.
Barclays, Deutsche Bank, Banco BPM and two German landesbanks also fell below the regulatory minimum 3% leverage ratio under the stress scenario.
But these banks were always likely to have a rougher ride than some of their peers in other EU nations, because the tests assumed cumulative GDP growth over the three-year period of –3.3% in Germany and the UK, and –2.7% in Italy. That compares to just –1.5% for France and –0.2% for Ireland.
Furthermore, hefty falls in residential and commercial real estate prices factored into the tests would naturally cause more damage to banks with large mortgage portfolios, such as UK lenders.
To summarise, the EU stress tests have no official winners or losers, are harder for some banks to do well in than others, and allow participants to employ transitional measures that make them appear stronger. It’s a wonder we can call them ‘tests’ at all.
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.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
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. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Our take
In bank runs and market crashes, it matters how ideas ‘catch’
Contagion episodes show importance of network effects in finance
Hear no EVE, see no EVE
The Fed chastised SVB for poor rate-risk monitoring, but most US banks’ disclosures remain focused on earnings alone
Challenged single-name CDS market takes optimistic turn
Trading has boomed despite recent criticism, but can the market regain its former strength?
How banks can avoid bad haircuts on hedge fund trades
HSBC quant makes case for looking at collateral and funding rates in concert
The Catch-22 of US banks’ liquidity buffers
US banks are using held-to-maturity bonds to underpin liquidity adequacy, grating against accounting guidance. What happens if they’re forced to sell?
After a hack, loose lips won’t sink chips
Ion Group is the latest ransomware victim to stay mum about how it was compromised. No-one benefits from this code of silence
Taking the measure of CMS pricing
Bank of America quants propose comprehensive framework for modelling rate derivatives
Inflationary forces (and microbial soups)
The hold of central banks over inflation may be weaker than we thought