IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mul/jdp901/doi10.12831-85436y2016i2p179-194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bank internal ratings: are capital floors a suitable tool to restore their credibility?

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Resti

Abstract

In this note, we discuss the proposal for a reform of internal rating models outlined by the Basel Committee. We first present internal rating models (which currently generate roughly 50% of supervisory capital in the European Union) and the reasons why they have been increasingly criticised. We then review the key proposals circulated by the Basel Committee: the removal of internal models for «low-default portfolios» (where defaults are too infrequent to allow adequate calibration); additional constraints on internal models' estimates («input floors»); an «output floor» tying the capital requirements generated by internal ratings to those that would emerge from the standardised approach. We than explain why, in our opinion, floors represent a technically flawed answer, and suggest a number of supervisory actions that may be pursued, instead, to restore internal models' credibility, without causing an excessive burden for banking authorities. Such actions, which have already been explored by the EU in the last few years, should be embraced wholeheartedly by supervisors, to ensure that increased transparency on implementation and validation practices may restore market confidence in internal models.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Resti, 2016. "Bank internal ratings: are capital floors a suitable tool to restore their credibility?," Journal of Financial Management, Markets and Institutions, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 179-194, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:mul:jdp901:doi:10.12831/85436:y:2016:i:2:p:179-194
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rivisteweb.it/download/article/10.12831/85436
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.rivisteweb.it/doi/10.12831/85436
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:mul:jdp901:doi:10.12831/85436:y:2016:i:2:p:179-194. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.rivisteweb.it/ .

    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.