Banks should hold a system to quantify pre-settlement hazard. Pre-settlement recognition hazard can be estimated utilizing a assortment of methods. Techniques have evolved from utilizing the full fanciful sum of the contract, to a per centum of the fanciful sum, to loan tantamount estimations. Many Bankss now employ extremely sophisticated computing machine theoretical accounts to imitate the possible recognition exposure over the life of a derivative contract.
The recognition hazard in a derivative merchandise is a map of several factors. The hazard depends on the type of contract, hard currency flows, monetary value volatility, tenor, etc. Exposure at the beginning of a contract is normally at or near zero. Most trades are done at market monetary values ( off-market trades create an immediate recognition exposure, with the hazard most frequently taken by the bank ) , and most derivative contracts do non affect an exchange of principal. After origin, the expected hazard additions or lessenings to reflect the impact of altering monetary value factors. The longer the contract, the greater the possible for rate motions and, therefore, a alteration in possible exposure. Credit hazard is by and large reduced over the life of the contract because ( 1 ) interim hard currency flows cut down payment uncertainness and ( 2 ) the shorter the staying life of the contract the less possible there is that important inauspicious rate motions will happen. The recognition exposure will frequently be skewed to either the beginning or the terminal of the contract depending on the size of the rate derived functions and timing of hard currency flows.
The method used to mensurate counterparty recognition hazard should be commensurate with the volume and degree of complexness of the derivative activity. Traders and active position-takers should hold entree to statistically deliberate loan-equivalent exposures, which represent the current exposure ( replacement cost ) plus an estimation of the possible alteration in value over the staying life of the contract ( add-on ) . The replacing cost computation merely involves marking-to-market each derivative contract. The add-on is by and large determined utilizing model-based simulation. When patterning monetary value hazard, a bank should utilize a keeping period that reflects how long it would take to countervail or shut out a place. However, when patterning the recognition hazard add-on, a bank should do the clip horizon the staying life of the contract, because default can happen at any clip. More information on recognition hazard addons can be found in appendix H.
Risk Management of Financial Derivatives 48 Comptroller ‘s Handbook
Limited end-users may elect to utilize a less sophisticated method for mensurating the recognition hazard add-on ( e.g. , a per centum of fanciful value times figure of staying old ages to adulthood ) every bit long as they take other mitigating actions. Such actions include curtailing minutess to the highest quality counterparties and restricting activities to maturate, less volatile derivative contracts.
Recognition sweetenings and close-out gauze agreements besides affect the deliberate degree of recognition exposure. If the bank has a valid security involvement or lien on marketable assets or hard currency, the degree of recognition exposure reported for that counterparty may be reduced commensurately ( or at least identified as a separate line point ) .
Settlement hazard exposure is the cumulative sum of financess or assets delivered for payment and stopping points from the clip an outgoing payment order can no longer be canceled one-sidedly, until the clip the incoming payment is received with conclusiveness and reconciled. The continuance of an single bank ‘s colony exposure will depend on the features of the relevant payments systems every bit good as on the bank ‘s internal rapprochement processs.
Settlement patterns can make interbank exposures that last several yearss. This is peculiarly true of minutess settling across clip zones. Given current industry patterns, a bank ‘s maximal colony exposure could be, or even surpass, the sum receivable for three yearss ‘ worth of trades, so that at any point in clip, the sum at hazard to even a individual counterparty could transcend a bank ‘s capital. FX minutess, in peculiar, affect a higher grade of colony hazard because the full fanciful value is exchanged. It is non uncommon for larger trader Bankss to settle FX trades deserving good over $ 1 billion with a individual counterparty on a individual twenty-four hours.
Banks can cut down colony exposure by negociating their letter writer agreements to cut down the sum of clip they are exposed to noncancelable payments expecting colony. Further, Bankss should reexamine the clip necessary for rapprochement of payment reception. Reducing the clip it takes to place concluding and failed trades will cut down colony exposure.
Banks should besides sack colony payments, when lawfully allowable, instead than settling on a trade-by-trade footing. Netting is discussed subsequently in this subdivision, in appendix I, and in the “ Transaction Hazard ” and “ Conformity Hazard ” subdivisions.
Comptroller ‘s Handbook 49 Risk Management of Financial Derived functions
Recognition Hazard Limits
Counterparty recognition bounds should be approved before the executing of derivative minutess. Banks should set up counterparty recognition bounds in much the same manner as traditional recognition lines. Documentation in the recognition file should back up the intent, payment beginning, and collateral ( if any ) . Evaluations of single counterparty recognition bounds should aggregate bounds for derived functions with the recognition bounds established for other activities, including commercial loaning.
Presettlement hazard bounds should be established that are commensurate with the board ‘s hazard tolerance and the edification of the bank ‘s hazard measuring system. Less precise recognition hazard steps should be supplemented with more conservative bounds. For illustration, limited end-users normally use per centum of fanciful sum for mensurating recognition hazard. However, such Bankss should set up conservative presettlement hazard limits that take into consideration the impreciseness of these steps.
Banks should hold distinguishable bounds for colony hazard. The dollar volume of exposure due to colony hazard is frequently greater than the recognition exposure originating from presettlement hazard because colony hazard sometimes involves exchange of the entire fanciful value of the instrument or chief hard currency flow. However, it is of import to understand that colony hazard exists merely when chief hard currency flows are exchanged and bringing versus payment is non applied. Limits should reflect the recognition quality of the counterparty and the bank ‘s ain capital adequateness, operations efficiency, and recognition expertness. Any dealing that will transcend a bound should be pre-approved by an appropriate recognition officer. Reports to directors should enable them to easy acknowledge bounds that have been exceeded.
Mechanisms to Reduce Credit Exposure
A figure of mechanisms can cut down recognition exposure, including sacking agreements, recognition sweetenings, and early expiration understandings. In recent old ages, Bankss have progressively used these tools non merely to cut down recognition exposure but besides to minimise dealing costs and pull off recognition lines more expeditiously.
Before acknowledging the decrease in recognition hazard that these agreements provide, Bankss must guarantee that they are decently documented and lawfully enforceable. Footings of these agreements are normally outlined in a standardised maestro understanding covering specific merchandises such as the International Swaps and Derivatives Association ( ISDA ) understanding, Foreign Exchange and Options Agreement ( FEOMA ) , and International Currency Options Market ( ICOM ) understanding. Banks must besides guarantee that the
Risk Management of Financial Derivatives 50 Comptroller ‘s Handbook
agreements are lawfully enforceable in the relevant legal powers. See the “ Conformity Hazard ” subdivision for more information on certification and enforceability. Finally, Bankss must guarantee that they