IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/5313961.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The issues with the standardized measurement approach and a potential future direction for operational risk capital modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Ruben D Cohen

Abstract

Tensions have risen in the area of operational risk following the standardized measurement approach (SMA) proposal and the possible removal of the advanced measurement approach (AMA). These tensions, created by the desire for simplicity and transparency on the one hand and risk sensitivity on the other, are well reflected in many recent articles, which mostly criticize the SMA but praise the AMA. Here, we look at the criticism and praise in two current technical papers and note that although the validity of the SMA criticism is demonstrated with analytical precision, the praise for the AMA appears to lack similar justification. The reason for this is that the simplicity and transparency of the SMA allow objective analysis, whereas the complexity and opacity of the AMA do not. Moving on from this, it is proposed that a single, universal loss distribution approach-type (LDA-type) model may be the way forward for the next generation of operational risk capital models. This way, simplicity and transparency are retained as model qualities, while risk sensitivity, albeit at the entity level, is also improved over that of the SMA due to the nature of the LDA.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:5313961
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2017-09/The_issues_with_the_SMA.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:5313961. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.