CEIOPS anticipates Solvency II difficulties
The Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) has said it will struggle to meet the EU Commission’s demands for a factual report on the third quantitative impact study (QIS3) and a draft of the fourth study (QIS4) by the end of the year.
In a reply to the Commission’s call for a factual report on QIS3 by mid-November and complete draft of QIS4 by December 20, CEIOPS’ chair Thomas Steffen said: “The expected deliveries, both in their scope and timing, are particularly challenging. I would like to mention that the consequent workload will characterise CEIOPS’ work plan and priorities in the coming months and years, naturally
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
Review of 2025: It’s the end of the world, and it feels fine
Markets proved resilient as Trump redefined US policies – but questions are piling up about 2026 and beyond
BofA urges horizontal CCP fix after CME outage, others demur
Analysts say clearing meltdown bolsters case for futures-for-futures exchange with FMX
One in five banks targets a 30-day liquidity survival horizon
ALM Benchmarking research finds wide divergence in liquidity risk appetites, even among large lenders
Bank ALM tech still dominated by manual workflows
Batch processing and Excel files still pervade, with only one in four lenders planning tech upgrades
Many banks ignore spectre of SVB in liquidity stress tests
In ALM Benchmarking exercise, majority of banks have no internal tests focusing on stress horizons of less than 30 days
Quant Finance Master’s Guide 2026
Risk.net’s guide to the world’s leading quant master’s programmes, with the top 25 schools ranked
ALM Benchmarking: explore the data
View interactive charts from Risk.net’s 46-bank study, covering ALM governance, balance-sheet strategy, stress-testing, technology and regulation
Staff, survival days, models – where banks split on ALM
Liquidity and rate risks are as old as banking; but the 46 banks in our benchmarking study have different ways to manage them
