IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gmf/papers/2021-07.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficient credit portfolios under IFRS 9

Author

Listed:
  • Rui Pedro Brito

    (University of Coimbra, Centre for Business and Economics Research, CeBER and Faculty of Economic)

  • Pedro Alarcão Judice

    (ISCTE Business Research Unit)

Abstract

In this paper, we devise a forward-looking methodology to determine efficient credit portfolios under the IFRS 9 framework. We define and implement a credit loss model based on prospective point-in-time probabilities of default. We determine these probabilities of default and the credits’ stage allocation through a credit stochastic simulation. This simulation is based on the estimation of transition matrices. Using data from 1981 to 2019, in a non-homogeneous Markov chain setting, we estimate transition matrices conditional on the global real gross domestic product growth. This allows considering the effects of the economic cycle, which are of great importance in bank management. Finally, we develop a robust optimization model that allows the bank manager to analyze the tradeoff between the annual average portfolio income and the corresponding portfolio volatility. According to the proposed bi-objective model, we compute the efficient credit portfolios constructed based on 10-year maturity credits. We compare their structure to those generated by the IAS 39 and CECL accounting frameworks. The results indicate that the IFRS 9 and CECL frameworks generate efficient credit portfolios whose structure penalizes riskier-rated credits. In turn, the riskier efficient credit portfolios under the IAS 39 framework concentrate entirely on speculative-grade credits. This pattern is also encountered in efficient credit portfolios constructed based on credits with different maturities, namely 5 and 15 years. Moreover, the longer the maturity of the credits that enter into the composition of the efficient portfolios, the more the speculative-grade credits tend to be penalized.

Suggested Citation

  • Rui Pedro Brito & Pedro Alarcão Judice, 2021. "Efficient credit portfolios under IFRS 9," CeBER Working Papers 2021-07, Centre for Business and Economics Research (CeBER), University of Coimbra.
  • Handle: RePEc:gmf:papers:2021-07
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bee.fe.uc.pt/working-paper/pdf/01e48fc975664e408b9c6f2aeed42dbf/wp-ceber-2021-7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laeven, Luc & Majnoni, Giovanni, 2003. "Loan loss provisioning and economic slowdowns: too much, too late?," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 178-197, April.
    2. Eliana Balla & Andrew McKenna, 2009. "Dynamic provisioning: a countercyclical tool for loan loss reserves," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, vol. 95(Fall), pages 383-418.
    3. Michaud, Richard O. & Michaud, Robert O., 2008. "Efficient Asset Management: A Practical Guide to Stock Portfolio Optimization and Asset Allocation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780195331912.
    4. Suarez, Javier & ,, 2018. "The Procyclicality of Expected Credit Loss Provisions," CEPR Discussion Papers 13135, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Jorge Abad & Javier Suarez, 2020. "IFRS 9 and COVID-19: Delay and freeze the transitional arrangements clock," Vox eBook Chapters, in: AgneÌ€s BeÌ nassy-QueÌ reÌ & Beatrice Weder di Mauro (ed.), Europe in the Time of Covid-19, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 98-103, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    6. Robert A. Jarrow & David Lando & Stuart M. Turnbull, 2008. "A Markov Model for the Term Structure of Credit Risk Spreads," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Financial Derivatives Pricing Selected Works of Robert Jarrow, chapter 18, pages 411-453, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Krüger, Steffen & Rösch, Daniel & Scheule, Harald, 2018. "The impact of loan loss provisioning on bank capital requirements," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 114-129.
    8. Buesa, Alejandro & Población García, Francisco Javier & Tarancón, Javier, 2019. "Measuring the procyclicality of impairment accounting regimes: a comparison between IFRS 9 and US GAAP," Working Paper Series 2347, European Central Bank.
    9. Torsten Wezel & Mr. Jorge A Chan-Lau & Mr. Francesco Columba, 2012. "Dynamic Loan Loss Provisioning: Simulationson Effectiveness and Guide to Implementation," IMF Working Papers 2012/110, International Monetary Fund.
    10. Wei, Jason Z., 2003. "A multi-factor, credit migration model for sovereign and corporate debts," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 709-735, October.
    11. Jarque, Carlos M. & Bera, Anil K., 1980. "Efficient tests for normality, homoscedasticity and serial independence of regression residuals," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 255-259.
    12. G. Gardner & A. C. Harvey & G. D. A. Phillips, 1980. "An Algorithm for Exact Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Autoregressive–Moving Average Models by Means of Kaiman Filtering," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 29(3), pages 311-322, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fatouh, Mahmoud & Giansante, Simone, 2023. "The cyclicality of bank credit losses and capital ratios under expected loss model," Bank of England working papers 1013, Bank of England.
    2. Morais, Bernardo & Ormazabal, Gaizka & Peydro, J.L. & Roa, Monica & Sarmiento Paipilla, Miguel, 2020. "Forward Looking Loan Provisions : Credit Supply and Risk-Taking," Other publications TiSEM fe99a48f-f94a-41d8-bf3f-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Degryse, Hans & Huylebroek, Cédric, 2023. "Fiscal support and banks’ loan loss provisions during the COVID-19 crisis," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Buesa, Alejandro & Población García, Francisco Javier & Tarancón, Javier, 2019. "Measuring the procyclicality of impairment accounting regimes: a comparison between IFRS 9 and US GAAP," Working Paper Series 2347, European Central Bank.
    5. Malovaná Simona & Tesařová Žaneta, 2022. "Banks’ Credit Losses and Provisioning over the Business Cycle: Implications for IFRS," Review of Economic Perspectives, Sciendo, vol. 22(1), pages 53-74, March.
    6. Behn, Markus & Couaillier, Cyril, 2023. "Same same but different: credit risk provisioning under IFRS 9," Working Paper Series 2841, European Central Bank.
    7. Tristan Brouwer & Job Huttenhuis & Ralph ter Hoeven, 2021. "Empirical results for expected credit losses of G-SIBs during COVID-19. The proof of the pudding is in the eating," Maandblad Voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie Articles, Maandblad Voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie, vol. 95(11-12), pages 381-396, December.
    8. Oľga Pastiranová & Jiří Witzany, 2021. "Ifrs 9 And It´S Behaviour In The Cycle: The Evidence On The Eu Countries," FFA Working Papers 3.003, Prague University of Economics and Business, revised 02 May 2021.
    9. George J. Bratsiotis & Kasun D. Pathirage, 2023. "Monetary and Macroprudential Policy and Welfare in an Estimated Four-Agent New Keynesian Model," Economics Discussion Paper Series 2304, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    10. Germán López‐Espinosa & Gaizka Ormazabal & Yuki Sakasai, 2021. "Switching from Incurred to Expected Loan Loss Provisioning: Early Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 757-804, June.
    11. Ali Ashraf & M. Kabir Hassan & Kyle J. Putnam & Arja Turunen-Red, 2019. "Prudential Regulatory Regimes, Accounting Standards, And Earnings Management In The Banking Industry," Bulletin of Monetary Economics and Banking, Bank Indonesia, vol. 21(3), pages 1-28, January.
    12. Trueck, Stefan & Rachev, Svetlozar T., 2008. "Rating Based Modeling of Credit Risk," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780123736833.
    13. Gaffney, Edward & McCann, Fergal, 2019. "The cyclicality in SICR: mortgage modelling under IFRS 9," ESRB Working Paper Series 92, European Systemic Risk Board.
    14. Siem Jan Koopman & André Lucas & Pieter Klaassen, 2002. "Pro-Cyclicality, Empirical Credit Cycles, and Capital Buffer Formation," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-107/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. André Lucas & Siem Jan Koopman, 2005. "Business and default cycles for credit risk," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(2), pages 311-323.
    16. Bholat, David & Lastra, Rosa & Markose, Sheri & Miglionico, Andrea & Sen, Kallol, 2016. "Non-performing loans: regulatory and accounting treatments of assets," Bank of England working papers 594, Bank of England.
    17. Pfeifer, Lukáš & Hodula, Martin, 2021. "A profit-to-provisioning approach to setting the countercyclical capital buffer," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 45(1).
    18. Francis Osei-Tutu & Laurent Weill, 2021. "How language shapes bank risk taking," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 59(1), pages 47-68, April.
    19. Bernd Engelmann & Ha Pham, 2020. "Measuring the Performance of Bank Loans under Basel II/III and IFRS 9/CECL," Risks, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-21, September.
    20. Antonio Sánchez Serrano, 2018. "Financial stability consequences of the expected credit loss model in IFRS 9," Revista de Estabilidad Financiera, Banco de España, issue MAY.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    IFRS 9; IAS 39; CECL; credit risk; transition matrices; stochastic simulation.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C50 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - General
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G17 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Financial Forecasting and Simulation
    • G24 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Investment Banking; Venture Capital; Brokerage

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:gmf:papers:2021-07. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sofia Antunes (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cebucpt.html .

    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.