QIS5 results show US right to worry
BASEL AND LONDON – The results of quantitative impact study five (QIS5), released in June, left one US regulator proclaiming that he had been correct to be cautious after the QIS4 results showed wide swings in regulatory capital requirements as a result of the implementation of Basel II. Basel Committee on Banking Supervision members, on the other hand, firmly stuck to their guns and said no adjustments would be made to Basel II as a result of QIS5.
The QIS4 results – which focused only on the advanced internal ratings-based approach under credit risk as that is the only approach being allowed in the US by banks implementing Basel II – showed a 12.5% decline in required capital.
Meanwhile, the QIS5 results for the A-IRB approach showed a 7.1% decline for G-10 Group 1 banks, while G-10 Group 2 banks showed a whopping 26.7% decline. EU banks in
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
EBA seeks to allay Simm divergence concerns
EU validator pledges to co-ordinate with global regulators, but retains ability to act alone “if needed”
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
