Midlands State University Library
Image from Google Jackets

Stress testing convergence/ created by German Gutierrez Gallardo, Til Schuermann and Michael Duane

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextSeries: Journal of risk management in financial institutions ; Volume 9, number 1London : Henry Stewart Publication, 2016Content type:
  • text
Media type:
  • unmediated
Carrier type:
  • volume
ISSN:
  • 17528887
Subject(s): LOC classification:
  • HD61.J687 JOU
Online resources: Abstract: This year, 2015, marks the six-year anniversary of US regulatory stress testing. We observe three key trends: 1) Increasingly aggressive capital management: Banks initially responded to CCAR by maintaining wide capital cushions vs. regulatory minimums. However, as CCAR processes stabilize and capital minimums increase, some institutions appear to be managing capital more and more tightly, especially investment banks, universals and custodians. 2) Drivers of enhanced financial resource management: What allows institutions to manage capital more closely? First, stress test results are beginning to stabilize and, in some cases, converge. Second, although we have just a handful of examples, the market seems to reward aggressive capital requests, even if they are, at first, rejected by the Fed. 3) Unintended consequences: As stress test results converge and institutions begin to manage capital to Fed-projected results, the Fed’s stress testing models become an increasingly important driver of the fate of the financial system.
Reviews from LibraryThing.com:
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Vol info Status Notes Date due Barcode
Journal Article Journal Article Main Library - Special Collections HD61.J687 JOU (Browse shelf(Opens below)) Vol. 9, no.1 (pages 32-45) Not for loan For in house use only

This year, 2015, marks the six-year anniversary of US regulatory stress testing. We observe three key trends: 1) Increasingly aggressive capital management: Banks initially responded to CCAR by maintaining wide capital cushions vs. regulatory minimums. However, as CCAR processes stabilize and capital minimums increase, some institutions appear to be managing capital more and more tightly, especially investment banks, universals and custodians. 2) Drivers of enhanced financial resource management: What allows institutions to manage capital more closely? First, stress test results are beginning to stabilize and, in some cases, converge. Second, although we have just a handful of examples, the market seems to reward aggressive capital requests, even if they are, at first, rejected by the Fed. 3) Unintended consequences: As stress test results converge and institutions begin to manage capital to Fed-projected results, the Fed’s stress testing models become an increasingly important driver of the fate of the financial system.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.