2008 LDCE “under consideration”
Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to discuss a new loss data collection exercise at its next meeting in January
A new operational risk loss data collection exercise (LCDE) will be considered at the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s next meeting in January, according to Marco Moscadelli, senior analyst in banking supervision at the Bank of Italy and a member of the BCBS’s Accord Implementation Group.
Moscadelli, who was speaking at the OpRisk Middle East conference today in Dubai, noted the last global LDCE was conducted in 2001 and reported on by the Basel Committee in 2002. The US, Germany and a handful of other countries also conducted an LDCE in 2004, which was reported on in 2005. The new LDCE is expected to be global in scope, and could kick off as early as the first quarter of 2008 once it is approved.
LDCEs collect and compare loss data from banks in countries implementing Basel II, and were used to calibrate calculations for the various op risk approaches under the new Basel Accord when it was in development.
Moscadelli says the committee will discuss the “deliverables” of the LDCE for the banks themselves, including the format of the data input templates, and how the data will be processed and reported back to the industry.
Moscadelli also indicated there was a possibility that scenario analysis results will also be included in the LDCE, as many banks have been relying more on scenarios than on loss data in their op risk models.
Lastly, he said the LDCE would enable regulators to compare the data of advanced measurement approach candidates globally.
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 Risk management
Revealed: the three EU banks applying for IMA approval
BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo ask ECB to use internal models for FRTB
FICC takes flak over Treasury clearing proposal
Latest plans would still allow members to bundle clearing and execution – and would fail to boost clearing capacity, critics say
Buy side would welcome more guidance on managing margin calls
FSB report calls for regulators to review existing standards for non-bank liquidity management
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
Benchmark switch leaves hedging headache for Philippine banks
If interest rates are cut before new benchmark docs are ready, banks face possible NII squeeze
Op risk data: Tech glitch gives customers unlimited funds
Also: Payback for slow Paycheck Protection payouts; SEC hits out at AI washing. Data by ORX News
The American way: a stress-test substitute for Basel’s IRRBB?
Bankers divided over new CCAR scenario designed to bridge supervisory gap exposed by SVB failure
Industry warns CFTC against rushing to regulate AI for trading
Vote on workplan pulled amid calls to avoid duplicating rules from other regulatory agencies