IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2607.05484.html

SHARC: SHAP-Based Interpretability in Machine Learning Risk Models for Regulatory Capital under ICAAP and CCAR

Author

Listed:
  • Ujjwala Vadrevu

Abstract

The adoption of non-parametric machine learning models for regulatory capital estimation introduces a fundamental governance challenge: the inability to explain model outputs in a manner auditable by supervisory bodies. This 'black box' problem remains a major barrier to the adoption of Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) and related ML architectures in ICAAP and CCAR workflows despite their predictive advantages over traditional parametric approaches. This paper addresses this barrier through SHARC (SHAP for Regulatory Capital), an explainability framework for the Hybrid GPR-HS architecture and its stress-testing extension. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP), derived from cooperative game theory and satisfying the properties of Local Accuracy, Missingness, Consistency, and Efficiency, are applied to Stressed Value-at-Risk (SVaR) outputs under three macro scenarios: West Asia War, Climate Risk, and AI Bubble/Regulatory Burden. SHARC decomposes SVaR into baseline, mean-driven, and volatility-driven components, enabling transparent linkage between scenario design and capital outcomes. Two findings emerge. First, SHARC consistently links non-linear SVaR outputs to underlying scenario inputs, confirming framework fidelity and providing auditable traceability of capital drivers. Second, under stress conditions, the mean return component (directional loss magnitude) dominates the variance component (volatility baseline) in determining capital levels, with implications for capital limit-setting, position management, and hedging strategy. The results establish SHARC as a regulator-aligned explainability layer that makes the Hybrid GPR-HS framework fully auditable and consistent with FRTB, ICAAP Pillar 2, and CCAR transparency requirements.

Suggested Citation

  • Ujjwala Vadrevu, 2026. "SHARC: SHAP-Based Interpretability in Machine Learning Risk Models for Regulatory Capital under ICAAP and CCAR," Papers 2607.05484, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.05484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.05484
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexander J. McNeil & Rüdiger Frey & Paul Embrechts, 2015. "Quantitative Risk Management: Concepts, Techniques and Tools Revised edition," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 2, number 10496, December.
    2. Ujjwala Vadrevu, 2026. "A Hybrid Gaussian Process Regression Framework for Stable Volatility-Covariance Estimation: Evidence from Global Equity Indices," Papers 2605.17275, arXiv.org.
    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. Abduraimova, Kumushoy, 2022. "Contagion and tail risk in complex financial networks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Salvatore D. Tomarchio & Michael P. B. Gallaugher, 2026. "Mixtures of regressions using matrix-variate heavy-tailed distributions," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 20(1), pages 11-38, March.
    3. Tobias Fissler & Yannick Hoga, 2024. "How to Compare Copula Forecasts?," Papers 2410.04165, arXiv.org.
    4. Masahiko Egami & Rusudan Kevkhishvili, 2020. "Time reversal and last passage time of diffusions with applications to credit risk management," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 795-825, July.
    5. Avanzi, Benjamin & Taylor, Greg & Wong, Bernard & Yang, Xinda, 2021. "On the modelling of multivariate counts with Cox processes and dependent shot noise intensities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 9-24.
    6. Pfeifer Dietmar & Mändle Andreas & Ragulina Olena, 2017. "New copulas based on general partitions-of-unity and their applications to risk management (part II)," Dependence Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 246-255, October.
    7. Diba Daraei & Kristina Sendova, 2024. "Determining Safe Withdrawal Rates for Post-Retirement via a Ruin-Theory Approach," Risks, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, April.
    8. Makam, Vaishno Devi & Millossovich, Pietro & Tsanakas, Andreas, 2021. "Sensitivity analysis with χ2-divergences," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 372-383.
    9. Nevrla, Matěj, 2020. "Systemic risk in European financial and energy sectors: Dynamic factor copula approach," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(4).
    10. Dima, Bogdan & Dima, Ştefana Maria & Ioan, Roxana, 2025. "The short-run impact of investor expectations’ past volatility on current predictions: The case of VIX," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    11. Eric Vansteenberhge, 2025. "Insurance Supervision under Climate Change: A Pioneer Detection Method," Papers 2511.16760, arXiv.org.
    12. Chen, Yiqing, 2025. "The heavy-tail behavior of the difference of two dependent random variables," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    13. Battulga Gankhuu, 2022. "Merton's Default Risk Model for Private Company," Papers 2208.01974, arXiv.org.
    14. Saminger-Platz Susanne & Kolesárová Anna & Šeliga Adam & Mesiar Radko & Klement Erich Peter, 2024. "On comprehensive families of copulas involving the three basic copulas and transformations thereof," Dependence Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-36.
    15. Conlon, Thomas & Cotter, John & Ropotos, Ioannis, 2026. "Drivers of firm-level tail dependence: A machine learning approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    16. Jose Blanchet & Henry Lam & Yang Liu & Ruodu Wang, 2025. "Convolution Bounds on Quantile Aggregation," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 73(5), pages 2761-2781, September.
    17. Hengxin Cui & Ken Seng Tan & Fan Yang, 2024. "Portfolio credit risk with Archimedean copulas: asymptotic analysis and efficient simulation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 332(1), pages 55-84, January.
    18. Stephan Schlüter & Fabian Menz & Milena Kojić & Petar Mitić & Aida Hanić, 2022. "A Novel Approach to Generate Hourly Photovoltaic Power Scenarios," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, April.
    19. Borowska, Agnieszka & Hoogerheide, Lennart & Koopman, Siem Jan & van Dijk, Herman K., 2020. "Partially censored posterior for robust and efficient risk evaluation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 217(2), pages 335-355.
    20. Dietmar Pfeifer & Olena Ragulina, 2018. "Generating VaR Scenarios under Solvency II with Product Beta Distributions," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-15, October.

    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:arx:papers:2607.05484. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.