Accounting Treatment of Provisioning Requirements Under Expected Loss -CAFRAL Sep 2012
Expected Loss Over Lifetime
-
Upload
global-association-of-risk-professionals-garp -
Category
Economy & Finance
-
view
178 -
download
0
Transcript of Expected Loss Over Lifetime
Expected Loss Over Lifetime
Professor Daniel RoeschUniversity of Regensburg 15 March 2016
2
The views expressed in the following material are the
author’s and do not necessarily represent the views of
the Global Association of Risk Professionals (GARP),
its Membership or its Management.
Expected Loss Over Lifetime
Steffen Krüger, Toni Oehme, Daniel Rösch, HaraldScheule
Chair of Statistics and Risk Management, Faculty of Business, Economicsand Management Information SystemsUniversität Regensburg
Finance Discipline Group, University of TechnologySydney
March 15, 2016
Contents
1. Motivation
2. Methods
3. Data and Estimation Results
4. Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
5. Conclusion
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 2 / 34
Motivation
Agenda
1. Motivation
2. Methods
3. Data and Estimation Results
4. Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
5. Conclusion
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 3 / 34
Motivation
Credit loss
• Credit loss is determined by
L = D · LR · EAD (1)
where
D : Default indicator (1, if default, 0, else)LR : Loss rate
EAD : Exposure at default
• Here: EAD = 1
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 4 / 34
Motivation
Expected credit loss
• Expected credit loss is given by
E(L) = E(D) · E(LR) + Cov(D, LR)= E(D) · E(LR|D = 1) (2)= E(D) · E(LGD) (3)
where LGD is the loss (rate) given default.
→ What role does the link between default risk and LGD play?
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 5 / 34
Motivation
Regulatory Requirements
• BCBS (2005)• Downturn LGD:: ”[...] reflect economic downturn conditions where
necessary to capture the relevant risks.”• ”Under such conditions default rates are expected to be high so that if
recovery rates are negatively related to default rates, LGD parametersmust embed forecasts of future recovery rates that are lower thanthose expected during more neutral conditions.”
• BCBS (2009)• ”[...] there is need to cover substantially longer periods [...] as liquidity
conditions can change rapidly in stressed conditions.”• ”The bank should [...] assess the impact of recession-type scenarios,
including its ability to react over a medium to long time horizon.”
• IASB (2014): Impairment in IFRS 9 Financial Instruments• Lifetime expected credit losses: ”The expected credit losses that result
from all possible default events over the expected life of a financialinstrument.”
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 6 / 34
Motivation
IASB (2014)Impairment in IFRS 9 Financial Instruments
Stage Impairment requirement Impairment recognition
1 Origination / purchase 12-month expected credit losses2 Significantly increased credit risk Lifetime expected credit losses3 Credit-impaired Lifetime expected credit losses
• Introduction of concept of Lifetime expected credit losses (LEL)
→ Time-dependence of LGD estimates?
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 7 / 34
Motivation
Illustration of LGD Term Structure
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 8 / 34
Motivation
Literature on PD and LGD odels
• Default risk• PD models
• Altman (1968), Merton (1974), Gordy (2000), and Campbell et al. (2008)• Survival analysis
• Lee and Urrutia (1996), Shumway (2001), Duffie et al. (2007) and Duffieet al. (2009)
• Loss given default• Carey (1998), Pykhtin (2003), Qi and Yang (2009), Huang and Oosterlee
(2012) and Jankowitsch et al. (2014)
→ No actual dependence investigated
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 9 / 34
Motivation
Literature on PD/LGD Dependence ModelingThe link between default risk and losses given default
• LGDs are positively correlated with default rates• Frye (2000), Altman et al. (2005) and Acharya et al. (2007)
• ’Jointly’ modeling of default and LGD component• Chava et al. (2011), Bellotti and Crook (2012), Frye and Jacobs Jr
(2012)
• Ignoring dependence and sample selection results in biasedparameter estimates
• Rösch and Scheule (2014)
→ Need for further research
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 10 / 34
Motivation
This Paper: Two Important Issues andExtensions
1. ”Classical” PD and LGD models are separate modules:• A PD model and a stand-alone LGD model• However: LGD can only be observed conditional on a default• This imposes a sample selection mechanism• As known from early work (eg. Tobin, 1958), this creates inconsistent
LGD estimates, if PD and LGD are correlated and if this not properlyaddressed
2. ”Classical” PD models are one-periodic (eg. have a one-yearforecasting horizon)
• Need to model multi-year/lifetime defaults and the term structure ofLGDs over the lifetime
• As well as interaction (correlation) between default and LGD termstructure
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 11 / 34
Motivation
Contributions
• We propose a model for expected loss over lifetime (LEL) whichtakes into account
• Dependence between time-to-default and LGD via Copulas• Sample selection
• Derive term structures for PDs and LGDs
• Empirical strategy for estimation
• Estimation and LEL forecasting results for real-world data
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 12 / 34
Methods
Agenda
1. Motivation
2. Methods
3. Data and Estimation Results
4. Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
5. Conclusion
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 13 / 34
Methods
Expected Loss over Lifetime
• ELoL
LEL = E(1{T ≤m} · LGDT · b(T )
), (4)
where m denotes the maturity and b(T ) a discount factor• This is equivalent to
LEL =m∫
0
1∫0
fLGDT ,T (l, t) · l · b(t) dl dt (5)
• Dependence between default time (PD) and LGD is taken intoaccount in two ways:
• Deterministic: using joint covariates• Stochastic: using copulas
• Sample selection is addressed by adjusting the Likelihood
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 14 / 34
Methods
The Full Model and its Constituents I
• Maximum likelihood estimation• Likelihood:
L(βT , σ, βµ, ϕ, θ) =∏
i:Di=0
( 1 − FTi(ti) )∏
i:Di=1
f(Ti,Yi)(ti, yi)︸ ︷︷ ︸πit
(6)
where
πit = c(FTi(ti), FYi(yi)
)· fTi(ti) · fYi(yi) (7)
• PD: Survival (AFT) Model (T , βT , σ )
log Ti = β′T xT
i + σεi, (8)
• LGD: Beta Regression (Y , βµ, ϕ)
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 15 / 34
Methods
The Full Model and its Constituents II
• Let the LGD be described by the beta distributed random variable Y:
fY (y) = 1B(α, β)yα−1(1 − y)β−1, (9)
with parameters α, β > 0 and beta function B : (0, ∞)2 → R2
• Ferrari and Cribari-Neto (2004)
µ = α
α + βand ϕ = α + β. (10)
µi = 11 + exp(−β′
µxµi ) . (11)
• Copula (θ) with density c(·, ·)
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 16 / 34
Methods
Introduction to Copulas
Theorem (Special case of Sklar (1959))Let X and Y be univariate continuous random variables with cumulativedistribution functions FX , FY and joint distibution function F(X,Y ).
Then there exists a unique function C : [0, 1]2 → [0, 1] with
F(X,Y )(x, y) = C(FX(x), FY (y)) = C(u, v), u, v ∈ [0, 1], (12)
where C is called copula.
Example (Gaussian copula)
C(u, v) = Φ2(Φ−1(u), Φ−1(v); ρ), u, v ∈ [0, 1], ρ ∈ [−1, 1]. (13)
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 17 / 34
Methods
Properties of Analysed Copulas
Generator ParameterCopula Cθ(u, v), u, v ∈ [0, 1] φθ(t) space for θ
AMH uv1 − θ(1 − u)(1 − v) log 1 − θ(1 − t)
t [−1, 1)
Clayton (u−θ + v−θ − 1)− 1θ 1
θ(t−θ − 1) (−∞, 0) ∪ (0, ∞)
Frank − 1θ
log(
1 + (e−θu − 1)(e
−θv − 1)(e
−θ − 1)
)− log e
−θt − 1e
−θ−1 (−∞, ∞)
Gaussian Φ2(Φ−1(u), Φ−1(v); θ) - [−1, 1]
Gumbel exp(
−(
(− log(u))θ + (− log(v))θ) 1
θ
)(− log(t))θ [1, ∞)
Joe 1 −(
(1 − u)θ + (1 − v)θ − (1 − u)θ(1 − v)θ) 1
θ − log(1 − (1 − t)θ) [1, ∞)
Product uv − log(t) -
Student’s t t2(t−1(u), t−1(v); θ) - [−1, 1]
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 18 / 34
Methods
Scatterplot of various copulas
• Rank correlation coefficient Kendall’s τ =
{0, if Product copula,
0.3, else.
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 19 / 34
Data and Estimation Results
Agenda
1. Motivation
2. Methods
3. Data and Estimation Results
4. Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
5. Conclusion
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 20 / 34
Data and Estimation Results
Data
• Moody’s Default & Recovery Database (DRD)• Default and recovery data• Lifetime US-corporate bond data with long-term rating• 1982 - 2014• 48,828 observations (2,455 defaults)• Control variables
• Bond-specific (rating, seniority, maturity, face amount, coupon)• Issuer-specific (excess return, market-to-book-ratio,
net-income-to-total-assets, market-cap., liabilities-to-total-assetsindustry)
• Macro-economic (industry production, term spread, downturn andvintage effects)
data
LGD
Fre
quen
cy
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0
100
200
300
400
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 21 / 34
Data and Estimation Results
Default Rates and Mean LGDs
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 22 / 34
Data and Estimation Results
Models for Time to Default
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 23 / 34
Data and Estimation Results
Models for LGD
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 24 / 34
Data and Estimation Results
Copula Results
• Implies negative dependence of time-to-default and LGD• Biased parameter estimates otherwise• Best choice (Mc-Fadden R2):
• Log-logistic time-to-default• Frank copula
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 25 / 34
Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
Agenda
1. Motivation
2. Methods
3. Data and Estimation Results
4. Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
5. Conclusion
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 26 / 34
Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
Analysis of Specific Risk Buckets
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 27 / 34
Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
LGD Densities (Term Structures)
• Earlier default implies c.p. higher LGD and vice versa• Defaults just after origination by surprising and severe causes• Survival in a first part of maturity demonstrates financial strength
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 28 / 34
Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
Term Structures for PD and LGD
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 29 / 34
Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
Model Differences
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 30 / 34
Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
LEL Predictions for Industrial Bonds
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 31 / 34
Conclusion
Agenda
1. Motivation
2. Methods
3. Data and Estimation Results
4. Expected Loss Over Lifetime Results
5. Conclusion
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 32 / 34
Conclusion
Summary
• Link between time-to-default and LGD• Provide general model for Expected Loss over Lifetime• Derive term structures for PDs, LGDs, and ELoL• Negative dependence between time-to-default and LGD after
controlling for covariates
→ Ignoring dependence results in• Biased parameter estimates• Underestimation of risk
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 33 / 34
References
References I
Acharya, V. V., Bharath, S. T., Srinivasan, A., (2007). Does industry-wide distress affect de-faulted firms? Evidence from creditor recoveries. Journal of Financial Economics85 (3), 787–821.
Altman, E. I., (1968). Financial ratios, discriminant analysis and the prediction of corporatebankruptcy. The Journal of Finance 23 (4), 589–609.
Altman, E. I., Brady, B., Resti, A., Sironi, A., (2005). The Link between Default and Recov-ery Rates: Theory, Empirical Evidence, and Implications. Journal of Business 78 (6),2203–2228.
BCBS, (2005). Guidance on Paragraph 468 of the Framework Document. Bank for Interna-tional Settlements, Basel.
BCBS, (2009). Principles for sound stress testing practices and supervision. Bank for Interna-tional Settlements, Basel.
Bellotti, T., Crook, J., (Jan. 2012). Loss given default models incorporating macroeconomicvariables for credit cards. International Journal of Forecasting 28 (1), 171–182.
Campbell, J. Y., Hilscher, J., Szilagyi, J., (2008). In search of distress risk. The Journal of Fi-nance 63 (6), 2899–2939.
Carey, M., (1998). Credit risk in private debt portfolios. The Journal of Finance 53 (4), 1363–1387.
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 34 / 34
References
References II
Chava, S., Stefanescu, C., Turnbull, S., (2011). Modeling the Loss Distribution. ManagementScience 57 (7), 1267–1287.
Duffie, D., Eckner, A., Horel, G., Saita, L., (2009). Frailty correlated default. The Journal ofFinance 64 (5), 2089–2123.
Duffie, D., Saita, L., Wang, K., (2007). Multi-period corporate default prediction withstochastic covariates. Journal of Financial Economics 83 (3), 635–665.
Ferrari, S., Cribari-Neto, F., (2004). Beta regression for modelling rates and proportions.Journal of Applied Statistics 31 (7), 799–815.
Frye, J., (2000). Depressing recoveries. Risk 13 (11), 108–111.
Frye, J., Jacobs Jr, M., (2012). Credit loss and systematic loss given default. Journal of CreditRisk 8 (1), 1–32.
Gordy, M. B., (2000). A comparative anatomy of credit risk models. Journal of Banking &Finance 24 (1), 119–149.
Heckman, J. J., (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error. Econometrica, 153–161.
Huang, X., Oosterlee, C. W., (2012). Generalized beta regression models for random loss-given-default. The Journal of Credit Risk 7 (4), 45–70.
IASB, (2014). IFRS 9 Financial Instruments.
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 35 / 34
References
References III
Jankowitsch, R., Nagler, F., Subrahmanyam, M. G., (2014). The determinants of recoveryrates in the US corporate bond market. Journal of Financial Economics 114 (1), 155–177.
Lee, S. H., Urrutia, J. L., (1996). Analysis and prediction of insolvency in the property-liabilityinsurance industry: A comparison of logit and hazard models. Journal of Risk andInsurance, 121–130.
Merton, R. C., (1974). On the Pricing of Corporate Debt: The Risk Structure of InterestRates. The Journal of Finance 29 (2), 449–470.
Pykhtin, M., (2003). Unexpected recovery risk. Risk 16 (8), 74–78.
Qi, M., Yang, X., (2009). Loss given default of high loan-to-value residential mortgages.Journal of Banking & Finance 33 (5), 788–799.
Rösch, D., Scheule, H., (2014). Forecasting probabilities of default and loss rates given de-fault in the presence of selection. Journal of the Operational Research Society 65 (3),393–407.
Shumway, T., (2001). Forecasting Bankruptcy More Accurately: A Simple Hazard Model. TheJournal of Business 74 (1), 101–124.
Sklar, M., (1959). Fonctions de répartition à n dimensions et leurs marges. Université Paris8.
Tobin, J., (1958). Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica26 (1), 24–36.
Expected Loss Over Lifetime | Daniel Rösch | UR / UTS Sydney March 15, 2016 36 / 34
C r e a t i n g a c u l t u r e o f r i s k a w a r e n e s s ®
Global Association ofRisk Professionals
111 Town Square Place14th FloorJersey City, New Jersey 07310U.S.A.+ 1 201.719.7210
2nd FloorBengal Wing9A Devonshire SquareLondon, EC2M 4YNU.K.+ 44 (0) 20 7397 9630
www.garp.org
About GARP | The Global Association of Risk Professionals (GARP) is a not-for-profit global membership organization dedicated to preparing professionals and organizations to make better informed risk decisions. Membership represents over 150,000 risk management practitioners and researchers from banks, investment management firms, government agencies, academic institutions, and corporations from more than 195 countries and territories. GARP administers the Financial Risk Manager (FRM®) and the Energy Risk Professional (ERP®) Exams; certifications recognized by risk professionals worldwide. GARP also helps advance the role of risk management via comprehensive professional education and training for professionals of all levels. www.garp.org.
4 | © 2014 Global Association of Risk Professionals. All rights reserved.