IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijfss/v8y2020i2p27-d353344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Holistic Model Validation Framework for Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) Model Development and Implementation

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Jacobs

    (PNC Financial Services Group—Balance Sheet Analytics & Modeling/Model Development, 340 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10022, USA)

Abstract

The Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) revised accounting standard for credit loss provisioning is the most important change to United States (US) accounting standards in recent history. In this study, we survey and assess practices in the validation of models that support CECL, across dimensions of both model development and model implementation. On the development side, this entails the usual SR 11-7 aspects of model validation; however, highlighted in the CECL context is the impact of several key modeling assumptions upon loan loss provisions. We also consider the validation of CECL model implementation or execution elements, which assumes heightened focus in CECL given the financial reporting implications. As an example of CECL model development validation, we investigate a modeling framework that we believe to be very close to that being contemplated by institutions, which projects loan losses using time-series econometric models, for an aggregated “average” bank using Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Call Report data. In this example, we assess the accuracy of 14 alternative CECL modeling approaches, and we further quantify the level of model risk using the principle of relative entropy . Apart from the illustration of several model validation issues and practices that are of particular relevance to CECL, the empirical analysis has some potentially profound policy and model risk management implications. Specifically, implementation of the CECL standard may lead to under-prediction of credit losses; furthermore, coupled with the assumption that we are at an end to the favorable phase of the credit cycle, this may be interpreted as evidence that the goal of mitigating the procyclicality in the provisioning process that motivated CECL may fail to materialize.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Jacobs, 2020. "A Holistic Model Validation Framework for Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) Model Development and Implementation," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-36, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijfss:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:27-:d:353344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7072/8/2/27/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7072/8/2/27/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Commandeur, Jacques J.F. & Koopman, Siem Jan, 2007. "An Introduction to State Space Time Series Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199228874.
    2. Carlson, Mark & Shan, Hui & Warusawitharana, Missaka, 2013. "Capital ratios and bank lending: A matched bank approach," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 663-687.
    3. Kishan, Ruby P & Opiela, Timothy P, 2000. "Bank Size, Bank Capital, and the Bank Lending Channel," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 32(1), pages 121-141, February.
    4. Batchelor, Roy A. & Dua, Pami, 1990. "Product differentiation in the economic forecasting industry," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 311-316, October.
    5. Cornett, Marcia Millon & McNutt, Jamie John & Strahan, Philip E. & Tehranian, Hassan, 2011. "Liquidity risk management and credit supply in the financial crisis," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 297-312, August.
    6. Jose M. Berrospide & Rochelle M. Edge, 2010. "The Effects of Bank Capital on Lending: What Do We Know, and What Does It Mean?," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 6(34), pages 1-50, December.
    7. Jose M. Berrospide & Rochelle M. Edge, 2010. "The effects of bank capital on lending: What do we know, and what does it mean?," CAMA Working Papers 2010-26, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    8. Ben S. Bernanke & Cara S. Lown, 1991. "The Credit Crunch," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 22(2), pages 205-248.
    9. Hamilton, James D., 1988. "Rational-expectations econometric analysis of changes in regime : An investigation of the term structure of interest rates," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 12(2-3), pages 385-423.
    10. James H. Stock & Mark W. Watson, 2001. "Vector Autoregressions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 101-115, Fall.
    11. Sims, Christopher A, 1980. "Macroeconomics and Reality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-48, January.
    12. Bellotti, Tony & Crook, Jonathan, 2013. "Forecasting and stress testing credit card default using dynamic models," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 563-574.
    13. Stephen Goldfeld & Richard Quandt, 1973. "The Estimation of Structural Shifts by Switching Regressions," NBER Chapters, in: Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, Volume 2, number 4, pages 475-485, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Michael Jacobs, 2019. "An Analysis of the Impact of Modeling Assumptions in the Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL) Framework on the Provisioning for Credit Loss," Journal of Risk & Control, Risk Market Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 65-112.
    2. Sarah Chae & Robert F. Sarama & Cindy M. Vojtech & James Z. Wang, 2018. "The Impact of the Current Expected Credit Loss Standard (CECL) on the Timing and Comparability of Reserves," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2018-020, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    3. Gabriel Jiménez & Steven Ongena & José-Luis Peydró & Jesús Saurina, 2017. "Macroprudential Policy, Countercyclical Bank Capital Buffers, and Credit Supply: Evidence from the Spanish Dynamic Provisioning Experiments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(6), pages 2126-2177.
    4. Hessou, Helyoth & Lai, Van Son, 2018. "Basel III capital buffers and Canadian credit unions lending: Impact of the credit cycle and the business cycle," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 23-39.
    5. Stijn Claessens & M Ayhan Kose, 2018. "Frontiers of macrofinancial linkages," BIS Papers, Bank for International Settlements, number 95.
    6. Zheng, Yi, 2020. "Does bank opacity affect lending?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Budnik, Katarzyna & Bochmann, Paul, 2017. "Capital and liquidity buffers and the resilience of the banking system in the euro area," Working Paper Series 2120, European Central Bank.
    8. Malgorzata Olszak & Mateusz Pipien & Sylwia Roszkowska, 2016. "The Impact Of Capital Ratio On Lending Of Eu Banks – The Role Of Bank Specialization And Capitalization," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(1), pages 43-59, March.
    9. Carlson, Mark & Shan, Hui & Warusawitharana, Missaka, 2013. "Capital ratios and bank lending: A matched bank approach," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 663-687.
    10. Małgorzata Olszak & Iwona Kowalska & Patrycja Chodnicka-Jaworska & Filip Świtała, 2020. "Do cyclicality of loan-loss provisions and income smoothing matter for the capital crunch – the case of commercial banks in Poland," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 51(4), pages 383-436.
    11. Malgorzata Olszak & Mateusz Pipien & Sylwia Roszkowska & Iwona Kowalska, 2014. "The effects of capital on bank lending in large EU banks – the role of procyclicality, income smoothing, regulations and supervision," Faculty of Management Working Paper Series 52014, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management.
    12. Yasmeen Akhtar & Ghulam Mujtaba Kayani & Tahir Yousaf, 2019. "The Effects of Regulatory Capital Requirements and Ownership Structure on Bank Lending in Emerging Asian Markets," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, September.
    13. Roulet, Caroline, 2018. "Basel III: Effects of capital and liquidity regulations on European bank lending," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 26-46.
    14. Kim, Dohan & Sohn, Wook, 2017. "The effect of bank capital on lending: Does liquidity matter?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 95-107.
    15. Hsieh, Meng-Fen & Lee, Chien-Chiang & Lin, Yi-Ching, 2022. "New evidence on liquidity creation and bank capital: The roles of liquidity and political risk," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 778-794.
    16. Ben Naceur, S. & Marton, Katherin & Roulet, Caroline, 2018. "Basel III and bank-lending: Evidence from the United States and Europe," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-27.
    17. Olszak, Małgorzata & Roszkowska, Sylwia & Kowalska, Iwona, 2018. "Macroprudential policy instruments and procyclicality of loan-loss provisions – Cross-country evidence," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 228-257.
    18. Michael Jacobs, 2016. "Stress Testing and a Comparison of Alternative Methodologies for Scenario Generation," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 6(6), pages 1-7.
    19. Nakashima, Kiyotaka & Takahashi, Koji, 2018. "The real effects of bank-driven termination of relationships: Evidence from loan-level matched data," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 46-65.
    20. Sivec, Vasja & Volk, Matjaž, 2021. "Bank response to policy-related changes in capital requirements," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 868-877.

    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:gam:jijfss:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:27-:d:353344. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.