Cebs stresses simplicity and communication in report on liquidity buffers
An interim report from Cebs gives preliminary views on developing liquidity survival periods, buffers and the assets they should contain
LONDON - The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (Cebs) has released an interim report highlighting the need for a simple and open approach to developing liquidity buffers and survival periods. The report is Cebs' response to a request from the Economic and Financial Committee and is part of the follow-up to Cebs 30 recommendations on liquidity risk management released in September 2008.
Cebs highlights the diversity of approaches to liquidity buffers across European Union national supervisors, and suggests a simple approach well communicated between stakeholders will allow for flexibility across the great breadth and complexity of institutions in the region.
Preliminary views are offered on steering the banking industry's approach to calibrating and determining the size and composition of liquidity buffers over a range of set time periods, in addition to taking stock of factors such as currency and differing legal jurisdictions. The proposals are the result of dialogue conducted through Cebs' Industry Expert Group on Liquidity.
Cebs says a liquidity buffer is dependent upon three dimenstions: the severity of stress scenarios, the time horizon determined as a 'survival period', and the characteristics of the assets in the buffer.
The report "tentatively" suggests one month is an adequate survival period. Assets used in a buffer should be highly liquid - convertible to cash "immediately or within a very short time". Banks should be able to closely estimate the amount of liquidity the assets can generate, through using haircuts when necessary.
Further work will try to determine the size of buffer necessary and the asset types it should contain. These refined proposals will be laid out in a consultation paper that Cebs says it will bring out in mid-2009.
The interim report can be read here.
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 Regulation
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion