CEBS consults on diversification benefits of internal models
Level 3 committee starts public consultation on its technical approach to diversification of internal models
LONDON – The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) has begun a public consultation on its proposed technical approach to understanding claims for diversification benefits arising from internal models used by supervised institutions for Pillar II purposes.
The paper presents current thinking on the areas of supervisory interest regarding an institution's management structure, organisation and internal controls, within the framework of risk diversification effects claimed under Pillar II. These considerations could form part of a broader assessment of economic capital models where they incorporate diversification assumptions. The paper mainly refers to commonly accepted modelling practices and does not necessarily mean the supervisors will address internal economic capital models used for Pillar II purposes with the same intensity of scrutiny as in regulatory approval of Pillar I models.
Given the technical and complex nature of diversification measurement, and the potential for evolution of the underlying models, parameters and risk characteristics, the paper concentrates mainly on the general qualitative environment in which diversification modelling takes place, and on the quantitative approaches supervisors may consider when assessing firms' own measures of diversification.The CEBS’s main aim of the paper is for it to provide a dialogue between supervisors and the industry to allow them to assess diversification claims and highlight more clearly the particular factors within a diversification framework where supervisors will need to be convinced of the claims’ validity.
The consultation is open to all interested parties and will run until October 31, 2008. A public hearing is set for September 8, 2008.
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
Op risk data: HSBC hit with $400m external fraud loss
Also: China’s unlicensed trading clampdown; SocGen’s insurance mis-selling woes. Data by ORX News
Clearers face heavy lift on CME-FICC cross-margin service
Dual registration and regulation plus uncertainty over close-outs all weigh on client offering
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