skip to main content
10.1145/3490354.3494396acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicaifConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Learning regulator influence on internal risk weights

Published:04 May 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Current financial regulation allows banks to use internal models for determining their risk-based capital requirements. Economic theory suggests that banks have incentives to report downward-biased risk weights, a problem that regulators aim to address by auditing banks' models. We study whether different audit standards by different regulators affect internal risk weights, indicating that banks subject to laxer standards may report too low risk weights. We present a supervised learning method to study this question that accounts for the fact that risk weights for the same portfolio could vary across banks even if there was no misreporting. Our approach is based on a generalized least squares technique that learns an individual model for each bank, which we combine with Group Lasso shrinkage to study the importance of different features. We analyze a large sample of internal risk weights for European banks. Our results show that regulator characteristics do have an economically significant impact on risk weights and that their importance is similar to that of relevant economic variables. We conclude that this provides empirical support for the claim that banks do indeed report biased risk weights, thereby undermining regulations aimed at preventing another financial crisis.

References

  1. M. Ahn. 2010. Random Effect Selection in Linear Mixed Models. Ph.D. Dissertation. North Carolina State University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Mihye Ahn, Hao Helen Zhang, and Wenbin Lu. 2012. Moment-based method for random effects selection in linear mixed models. Statistica Sinica 22, 4 (2012), 1539.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Douglas Bates, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker. 2014. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.5823 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. M. Behn, R. Haselmann, and V. Vig. 2016. The Limits of Model-based Regulation. Technical Report 1928. ECB. Working Paper Series.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrea Beltratti and Giovanna Paladino. 2016. Basel II and regulatory arbitrage. Evidence from financial crises. Journal of Empirical Finance 39 (2016), 180--196.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Tobias Berg and Philipp Koziol. 2017. An analysis of the consistency of banks' internal ratings. Journal of Banking and Finance 78 (2017), 27--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Patrick Breheny and Jian Huang. 2015. Group descent algorithms for nonconvex penalized linear and logistic regression models with grouped predictors. Statistics and computing 25, 2 (2015), 173--187.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Sophia Doeme and Stefan Kerbl. 2017. Comparability of Basel risk weights in the EU banking sector. Financial Stability Report 34 (2017), 68--89. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:onb:oenbfs:y:2017:i:34:b:2Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. EBA. 2014. Results of 2014 EU-wide stress test. European Banking Authority (2014). https://www.eba.europa.eu/-/eba-publishes-2014-eu-wide-stress-test-resultsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. EBA. 2015. EU-wide Transparency Exercise 2013. European Banking Authority (2015). https://www.eba.europa.eu/risk-analysis-and-data/eu-wide-transparency-exercise/2015/resultsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. EBA. 2016. EU wide Stress Test Methodological Note. European Banking Authority (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. EBA. 2017. EU-wide Transparency Exercise 2017. European Banking Authority (2017). https://www.eba.europa.eu/risk-analysis-and-data/eu-wide-transparency-exercise/2017Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. EBA. 2018. EU-wide Transparency Exercise 2018. European Banking Authority (2018). https://www.eba.europa.eu/risk-analysis-and-data/eu-wide-transparency-exercise/2018Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. EBA. 2019. EU-wide Transparency Exercise 2019. European Banking Authority (2019). https://www.eba.europa.eu/risk-analysis-and-data/eu-wide-transparency-exercise/2019Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. EBA. 2020. RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE EUROPEAN BANKING SYSTEM. European Banking Authority (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Giovanni Ferri and Valerio Pesic. 2017. Bank regulatory arbitrage via risk weighted assets dispersion. Journal of Financial Stability 33 (2017), 331--345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Jerome Friedman, Trevor Hastie, Robert Tibshirani, et al. 2001. The elements of statistical learning. Vol. 1. Springer series in statistics New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. David A Harville. 1974. Bayesian inference for variance components using only error contrasts. Biometrika 61, 2 (1974), 383--385.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Nicholas J Higham. 1997. Stable iterations for the matrix square root. Technical Report. 227--242 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Björn Imbierowicz, Axel Löffler, and Ursula Vogel. 2021. The transmission of bank capital requirements and monetary policy to bank lending in Germany. Review of International Economics 29, 1 (2021), 144--164.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Robert A Jarrow. 2009. Credit risk models. Annu. Rev. Financ. Econ. 1, 1 (2009), 37--68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Christoffer Kok, Carola Müller, Cosimo Pancaro, et al. 2019. The disciplining effect of supervisory scrutiny on banks' risk-taking: evidence from the EU wide stress test. Macroprudential Bulletin 9 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Mike Mariathasan and Ouarda Merrouche. 2014. The manipulation of basel risk-weights. Journal of Financial Intermediation 23, 3 (2014), 300--321.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Patrick McConnell. 2013. Systemic operational risk: the LIBOR manipulation scandal. Journal of Operational Risk 8, 3 (2013), 59--99.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Michael Sigmund and Christoph Siebenbrunner. 2021. The moral hazard problem in banks' risk reporting. Working paper (2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Noah Simon and Robert Tibshirani. 2012. Standardization and the group lasso penalty. Statistica Sinica 22, 3 (2012), 983.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Robert Tibshirani. 1996. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 58, 1 (1996), 267--288.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. F. Vallascas and J Hagendorff. 2013. The risk sensitivity of capital requirements: Evidence from an international sample of large banks. Review of Finance 17, 6 (2013), 1947--1988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. G. Verbeke and G. Molenberghs. 2000. Econometric Analysis (1. ed.). Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Ming Yuan and Yi Lin. 2006. Model selection and estimation in regression with grouped variables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology) 68, 1 (2006), 49--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Learning regulator influence on internal risk weights

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          ICAIF '21: Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on AI in Finance
          November 2021
          450 pages
          ISBN:9781450391481
          DOI:10.1145/3490354

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 4 May 2022

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)11
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader