This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Quantitative Validation of Rating Models for Low Default Portfolios through Benchmarking

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Markus Ricke () (Oesterreichische Nationalbank)
Georg von Pföstl (Oesterreichische Nationalbank)
Abstract

The new capital adequacy framework (Basel II) is one of the most fiercely debated topics the financial sector has seen in the recent past. Following a consultation process that lasted several years, the regulations formally took effect on January 1, 2007. The advanced approaches (the advanced internal ratings-based, or A-IRB, approach and the advanced measurement approach, or AMA) are scheduled to become operational on January 1, 2008. The new framework allows banks to use the IRB approach for the calculation of the assessment base for credit risk. Use of the IRB approach is subject to regulatory approval, which can only be obtained if the internal rating systems meet certain requirements. One of these requirements is that the models employed must have good predictive power. Banks must review this predictive power once a year by performing a qualitative and quantitative validation of the models. The statistical methods used to perform quantitative validation require a significant amount of default data to derive valid statements about the model, but such data are typically scarce in the case of rating models for so-called low default portfolios (LDPs), i.e. portfolios for which banks have little default history. In this paper, we first deal with the general problems of LDPs under the IRB approach and cover the problems of validating rating models for LDPs. We then present an alternative method for the quantitative validation of such models, based on the idea of benchmarking. Finally, we provide an example of the application of the proposed validation method. JEL classification: G20, C19

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.oenb.at/en/img/fsr_14_special_topics_04_tcm16-76882.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by Oesterreichische Nationalbank (Austrian Central Bank) in its journal Financial Stability Report.

Volume (Year): (2007)
Issue (Month): 14 (December)
Pages: 117-125
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:onb:oenbfs:y:2007:i:14:b:4

Contact details of provider:
Postal: P.O. Box 61, A-1011 Vienna, Austria
Phone: +43/1/404 20 3126
Fax: +43/1/404 20 3199
Email:
Web page: http://www.oenb.at
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Postal: Oesterreichische Nationalbank, Documentation Management and Communications Services, Otto-Wagner Platz 3, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
Email:

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Stefan W. Schmitz).

Related research
Keywords: rating models; validation; benchmarking; low default portfolios;

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? A few items listed on IDEAS are over 2000 years old!

This page was last updated on 2009-12-17.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.