Can you explain why banks use IRB models?

With IRB framework license in place, financial institutions can assess risks and allocate capital buffer to cover those potential risks, based on internal data, and estimates of risk components. It also allows banks to model risk and specify risk appetite in a more precise manner, which will consequently lead to a more precise calculation of capital requirements.

Permission to use IRB models on considerably big and at the same time high credit quality low-risk profile portfolios, could have a significant impact on lowering capital requirements. This could result in a noticeable financial benefit for the shareholders. At the same time banks could benefit from the investments in IRB models by leveraging from the increased advance in IT and data infrastructure, knowledge pool in predictive analytics area, better understanding of their client data and potential behaviour. Being more advanced in credit risk management practices, evolves into a better risk understanding and gives a possibility to build more accurate, risk-related pricing systems and models, more effective and automated credit decision engines and processes, better overview and oversight of the quality of already existing banks’ asset basis.

Introduction of IRB models increases transparency and integrity towards the regulatory environment too. It requires the exceptionally open dialogue towards all drawbacks in existing model space, data, and development processes with the regulators; which guarantees higher trust among customer basis and financial society in general.

How can a bank use IRB models as a method of reducing its capital requirements?

IRB roll-out could potentially decrease capital requirement. However, internal risk estimates have to be robust enough, incorporating sufficient amount of high quality historical data, well-accepted technical standards and assumptions, adequate amount of default events, having the right level of conservatism and high standard IRB development practices.

In my opinion, the reduction of the capital requirement should not be the only and the main incentive of becoming IRB advanced bank. The introduction of the competent, collaborative with regulators and transparent risk management and modelling function, should also be one of the main aspects in the process of adopting IRB framework. 

What do you think is the future of IRB models and the standardised approach?

In my opinion, the pressure for financial institutions from the regulators with regards to IRB models will be gradually increasing. Examples such as the consultative document, from Basel Committee, on Banking Supervision ‘Reducing variation in credit risk-weighted assets – constraints on the use of internal model approaches’ might mark this beginning. Regulators are strongly advocating broader convergence of IRB frameworks across the markets.

Their main reason for this is too much flexibility on existing IRB frameworks regarding various definitions, assumptions, and fulfilment of requirements. This results in very different capital requirements and too little comparability of risk weights as well as risk modelling practices across even the same market peers, at the same time, for the same portfolios. This variability strengthens suspicions regarding model-risk phenomena, various inconsistencies in the assumptions or methods chosen and the lack of trust in existing IRB frameworks in general. This is the main driver for moving towards standard approach and envisioning this alternative as an inevitable solution for some of portfolios like LDP, large corporate, and maybe some others in the future.

How would you say banks are using their IRB models as a base for developing their IFRS9 models?

The essence of the IFRS 9 regulation is that financial institutions will be recognizing impairment amounts based on the best estimate of the expected credit losses. All assets will be divided into three stages: (1) assets with no significant increase in credit risk, (2) assets with significant increase in credit risk and (3) credit impaired assets.

IFRS 9 framework could directly leverage from the existing IRB framework by reusing some of  the existing IRB models with small or even without any adjustments, like LGD, including forward-looking elements or using 12 months PD directly unchanged for stage (1) assets. In addition to the list of existing IRB models, some new IFRS9 specific components should be developed for the IFRS9 purposes, such as lifetime PD, specifically needed for stage (2) and (3) assets, or prepayment model.

From my point of view, IFRS 9 framework should be seen as a broader generalization of existing IRB framework and its elements. IFRS 9 just has some additional purposes and applicability.

What would you like to achieve by attending the 3rd Edition IRB Models, the Standardised Approach for Credit Risk, and Capital Floors Conference?

The main priority would be the productive exchange of views and experiences regarding the latest upcoming changes of IRB regulation. I would also like to participate in the discussions and get a fresh perspective on IFRS9 implementation challenges and successes.

Request a Brochure

Learn, explore and unleash your inner chef.

For more information, contact:
Yiota Andreou

Ahead of the 3rd Edition IRB Models, the Standardised Approach for Credit Risk, and Capital Floors Conference, we spoke with Darius Grinvaldas, Vilnius Group Risk Management Site Leader at Danske Bank, about the future of IRB models and the standardised approach.

Practical Insights From:
Addiko Bank
AXA Bank Belgium
Banco de Portugal
Bank of Ireland
Danske Bank
European Banking Authority
FBN Bank
Global Credit Data
Jyske Bank
Nova KBM
Oesterreichische Nationalbank
Prudential Regulatory Authority
Shawbrook Bank
UIster Bank
UK Finance


About the Conference:

This marcus evans event will enable banks to discuss the latest updates from the Basel committee and how banks are developing or amending their credit risk models in order to comply with the requirements, as well as looking in detail at both the benefits and the issues with the use of standardised models, and the lessons that can be learned from the ECB’s TRIM exercise. The event will also look at how a bank’s credit risk modelling can be streamlined by looking at IRB models, IFRS9 credit risk modelling and the ICAAP in an integrated approach, in addition to discussing remaining key issues before the deadline for the IFRS9 implementation in January. By discussing the issues in the credit risk modelling area today, individual firms, as well as the industry as a whole, will be able to proceed in the knowledge that everyone is moving forward together.
3rd Edition IRB Models, the Standardised Approach for Credit Risk, and Capital Floors Conference will take place from the 27th until the 28th of November 2017 in London, UK.

Copyright © 2017 Marcus Evans. All rights reserved.

Previous Attendees Include: 

Alpha Bank
Bank of Ireland
BNP Paribas
Credit Suisse
Danske Bank
Metro Bank
Morgan Stanley
Nedbank Sydbank

About the speaker:

Darius Grinvaldas has more than 10 years of experience in financial analysis, equity research, and risk management areas. For the last 7 years he have been working in credit risk management area of Danske Bank. His experience includes credit portfolio risk analysis, IRB parameter estimation and modelling, various other IRB related projects. Since May of 2017 Darius is a Site Leader for GRM Vilnius site, in which a number of Danske Bank GRM modelling and risk analysis teams are working together globally with the professionals from Copenhagen and other places of Danske Bank Group.

The future of IRB models and the standardised approach.


An interview Darius Grinvaldas, Vilnius Group Risk Management Site Leader at Danske Bank

Darius Grinvaldas, Vilnius Group Risk Management Site Leader at Danske Bank

Fix the following errors: