Model Risk Management – Expanding quantification of model risk
February 2024
8 min read
Authors:
Andreas Peter, Alexander Mottram, Hisham Mirza
Share:
Model risk from risk models has become a focal point of discussion between regulators and the banking industry.
Model risk from risk models has become a focal point of discussion between regulators and the banking industry. As financial institutions strive to enhance their model risk management practices, the need for robust model risk quantification becomes paramount.
An introduction to model risk quantification
Many firms already have comprehensive model risk management frameworks that tier models using an ordinal rating (such as high/medium/low risk). However, this provides limited information on potential losses due to model risk or the capital cost of already identified model risks. Model risk quantification uses quantitative techniques to bridge this gap and calculate the potential impact of model risk on a business.
The goal of a model risk quantification framework
As with many other sources of risk within a financial institute, the aim is to manage risk by holding capital against potential losses from the use of individual models across the firm. This can be achieved by including model risk as a component of Pillar 2 within the Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP).
Key components of a quantification framework
An effective model risk quantification framework should be:
Risk-based: By utilising model tiering results to identify models with risk worth the cost of quantifying.
Process driven: By providing a system for identifying, measuring and classifying the impact of model risks.
Aggregable: By producing results that can be aggregated and including a methodology for aggregating model results to a firm level.
Transparent & capitalised: By regularly reporting aggregated firm-wide model risk and managing it using capitalisation.
Blockers impeding model risk quantification
Complications of quantification include:
Implementation and running costs: Setting up and regularly running any quantification test involves significant resource costs.
Uncovered risk: Trying to quantify all potential model risk is a Sisyphean task.
Internal resistance: Quantification and capitalisation of model risks will require increased resources to produce, leading to higher costs, making it a hard initiative to motivate individuals to follow.
Concepts in Model Risk Quantification
Impacts of Model Risk
Model risk significantly influences financial institutions through valuations, capital requirements, and overall risk management strategies. The uncertainties tied to model outcomes can have profound impacts on regulatory compliance, economic capital, and the firm's standing in the financial ecosystem.
Model tiering
Model tiering is a qualitative exercise that assesses the holistic risk of a model by considering various factors (e.g. materiality, importance, complexity, transparency, operational intricacies, and controls).
The tiering output grades the risk of a model on an ordinal scale, comparing it to other models within the institute. However, it doesn't provide a quantitative metric that can be aggregated with other models.
Overlap with quantitative regulations
Most firms already perform quantitative processes to measure the performance of Pillar 1 models that impact the regulatory capital held (such as the VaR backtesting multiplier applied to market risk RWA).
Model Risk Quantification Framework - The Model Uncertainty Approach
A crucial step in building a robust model risk quantification framework is classifying and assessing the impact of model risk. The model uncertainty approach is an internal quantitative approach in which model risks are identified and quantified on an individual level. Individual model risks are subsequently aggregated and translated into a monetary impact on the bank.
Regulatory Model Risk Quantificaiton Methods - RNIV, Backtesting Multiplier, Prudent Valuation and MoC
Most banks are already familiar with quantification techniques recommend by regulators for risk management. Below we highlight some of these techniques that can be used as the basis for expansion of quantification within a firm.
Expanding Model Risk Quantification
Our approach to efficient measurement relies on two key components. The first is model risk classifications to prioritize models to quantify, and the second is a knowledge base of already implemented regulatory and internally developed techniques to quantify that risk. This approach provides good risk coverage whilst also being extremely resource efficient.
However, CCR remains an essential element in banking risk management, particularly as it converges with valuation adjustments. These changes reflect growing regulatory expectations, which were
The timelines for the entire exercise have been extended to accommodate the changes in scope: Launch of exercise (macro scenarios)Second half of January 2025First submission of results to
Within the field of financial risk management, professionals strive to develop models to tackle the complexities in the financial domain. However, due to the ever-changing nature of financial
Addressing biodiversity (loss) is not only relevant from an impact perspective; it is also quickly becoming a necessity for financial institutions to safeguard their portfolios against
SAP highlighted their public vs. private cloud offerings, RISE and GROW products, new AI chatbot applications, and their SAP Analytics Cloud solution. In addition to SAP's insights, several
SAP In-House Cash (IHC) has enabled corporates to centralize cash, streamline payment processes, and recording of intercompany positions via the deployment of an internal bank. S/4 HANA
Historically, SAP faced limitations in this area, but recent innovations have addressed these challenges. This article explores how the XML framework within SAP’s Advanced Payment Management
Despite the several global delays to FRTB go-live, many banks are still struggling to be prepared for the implementation of profit and loss attribution (PLA) and the risk factor eligibility
In a world of persistent market and economic volatility, the Corporate Treasury function is increasingly taking on a more strategic role in navigating the uncertainties and driving corporate
Security in payments is a priority that no corporation can afford to overlook. But how can bank connectivity be designed to be secure, seamless, and cost-effective? What role do local
In brief
Despite an upturn in the economic outlook, uncertainty remains ingrained into business operations today.
As a result, most corporate treasuries are
After a long period of negative policy rates within Europe, the past two years marked a period with multiple hikes of the overnight rate by central banks in Europe, such as the European
On the 22nd of August, SAP and Zanders hosted a webinar on the topic of optimizing your treasury processes with SAP S/4HANA, with the focus on how to benefit from S/4HANA for the cash &
Banks perform data analytics, statistical modelling, and automate financial processes using model software, making model software essential for financial risk management.
Why banks
In the high-stakes world of private equity, where the pressure to deliver exceptional returns is relentless, the playbook is evolving. Gone are the days when financial engineering—relying
The Basel IV reforms, which are set to be implemented on 1 January 2025 via amendments to the EU Capital Requirement Regulation, have introduced changes to the Standardized Approach for
With the introduction of the updated Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR3), which has entered into force on 9 July 2024, the European Union's financial landscape is poised for significant
The heightened fluctuations observed in the commodity and energy markets from 2021 to 2022 have brought Treasury's role in managing these risks into sharper focus. While commodity prices
VaR has been one of the most widely used risk measures in banks for decades. However, due to the non-additive nature of VaR, explaining the causes of changes to VaR has always been
The Covid-19 pandemic triggered unprecedented market volatility, causing widespread failures in banks' internal risk models. These backtesting failures threatened to increase capital