The long-term effect of Covid-19 on market risk capital
Covid-19 has replaced the global financial crisis in some banks’ stressed VAR calculations
The feral markets that accompanied the start of the coronavirus pandemic may be a thing of the past, but they continue to affect banks’ capital charges – and will do so for some time to come.
Trading book capital requirements are set using a series of risk indicators, one of which is stressed value-at-risk (SVAR). A bank measures this by calculating how much its current portfolio would fall in value if subjected to a 12-month period of historic stress.
Most banks anchor this stress period to the global financial crisis. But the record-breaking moves witnessed earlier this year have compelled some to instead use a 12-month period that includes the coronavirus outbreak.
Royal Bank of Canada is one example. In fiscal Q3, the firm said it had switched to using a stressed period that included the coronavirus outbreak. This pushed its SVAR-based capital requirement up 30%, or C$64 million.
US banks change the historical period used for SVAR dynamically as their portfolio changes. A capital manager at one large dealer tells Risk.net the Covid shock would have been included in many banks’ calculations during the second quarter.
On its own, SVAR makes up just a fraction of a bank’s overall market risk capital charge. But the ‘regular’ VAR-based requirement – calculated using the most recent 12 months of historical market data – has also rocketed, as banks’ internal models have factored in the wild swings earlier this year.
Some banks have therefore been hit with a double whammy as VAR- and SVAR-based charges jumped higher in tandem. JP Morgan has seen its VAR- and SVAR-based charges climb 377% and 39%, respectively, since the end of 2019. Together, they made up almost half of its total market risk capital requirement at end-June, up from 31% six months prior.
‘Regular’ VAR-based charges will stay elevated at most banks for at least a year, after which time the Covid shock will start rolling out of the observation data. But for those banks that have to retain the Covid period for their SVAR-based charge, market risk capital requirements may remain stuck at a higher level for many, many years.
This may affect capital-allocation decisions across trading desks. For example, a trading desk that did particularly poorly during the first quarter of this year – say, equity derivatives – may be more capital-intensive under an SVAR measure that incorporates the Covid shock than under the global financial crisis stress.
To paraphrase William Faulkner, “the (market) past is never dead. It’s not even past”.
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 Our take
Nvidia is growing up. It’s not settling down
Chip maker is a mega cap that doesn’t act like one
FX forwards dealers face added challenges in P&L analysis
Mark-out tools for forwards and swaps trading may not be a panacea
Can history resolve factor investors’ p-hacking questions?
Quants seek reassurance in the far distant past
Insurance double-hatters like Apollo can expect more scrutiny
Regulators are homing in on conflicts of interests at private-equity-owned insurers
Podcast: Lorenzo Ravagli on why the skew is for the many
JP Morgan quant proposes a unified framework for trading the volatility skew premium
Quants see promise in DeBerta’s untangled reading
Improved language models are able to grasp context better
Counterparty risk model links defaults to portfolio values
Fed’s Michael Pykhtin proposes using copula models to capture effects of margin calls on default risk
Does Basel’s internal loss multiplier add up?
As US agencies mull capital reforms, one regulator questions past losses as an indicator of future op risk