IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/5346106.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A note on the standard measurement approach versus the loss distribution approach–advanced measurement approach: the dawning of a new regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Andrés Mora-Valencia

Abstract

A recent Basel Committee on Banking Supervision publication suggesting a switch from the advanced measurement approach (AMA) to the standard measurement approach (SMA) has generated debate in the financial industry and among academics regarding the new rules. This note presents a nonexhaustive review of the literature on operational risk quantification under a combination of the loss distribution approach model – the most commonly used of the AMA models – and extreme value theory. The literature review points out that Bayesian inference has provided solutions to different problems when modeling operational data. The main comments prepared by the financial industry in response to the new proposal and two recently published papers that analyze the impact of SMA are also summarized. Finally, the discussion section proposes an alternative solution – a single-loss approximation model (taking into account several severity and frequency distributions) with an appropriate risk measure under a Bayesian model averaging setting – as an intermediate solution to estimate operational risk capital. Its application will be the focus of future research.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:5346106
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2017-11/A_note_on_SMA_versus_LDA%E2%80%93AMA.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:journ3:5346106. 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.