IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/2427631.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review stress tests: is regression the only tool for loss projection?

Author

Listed:
  • Pawel Siarka and Lina Chan

Abstract

ABSTRACT We present a cross-sectional stress test analysis of major US banks, focusing on wholesale commercial and industrial loans in the context of the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review promulgated by the US Federal Reserve Board. We model gross charge-off rates for selected banks in the United States and demonstrate how the composition of the bank portfolios affects the overall losses. We compare the results of the autoregressive moving-average model with exogenous inputs with those of the modified one-factor model and, moreover, present an alternative method that uses an extreme value theory approach to compare the results of a traditional directmacro-sensitive model with the results of a model leveraging latent market factors. The results of the comparative analyses show that our proposed method gives the banks an alternative perspective on potential losses under the stress test scenarios and that asset correlations are different between banks. Such differences lead to various gross charge-off dispersions. In fact, the borrower asset correlation increases the unexpected loss. We also show that the expected value of maximum losses in the alternative extreme value theory approach in a given horizon corresponds closely to the severely adverse scenarios prescribed by the US Federal Reserve Board.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:2427631
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/import/protected/digital_assets/9208/CCAR_stress_tests.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:journ5:2427631. 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-risk-model-validation .

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.