The Clearing House (TCH) published a new research note, “Fed’s versus banks’ own models in stress testing: what have we learned so far?” that analyzes the results of the supervisory stress tests obtained using the Fed’s models relative to the results obtained using banks’ own models under the Dodd-Frank Act stress tests over the past 5 years. The analysis finds: (i) banks’ projections of pre-tax net income are on average more pessimistic than the Fed’s projections, particularly for revenues under stress; (ii) the Fed projects that asset and loan balances grow over the stress horizon, with a resulting increase in risk-weighted assets, while banks assume that their balance sheets shrink due to a decrease in loan demand during a severe recession, with a resulting decrease in risk-weighted assets; and (iii) the disagreement between banks’ own projections and the Fed’s are persistent but only predictable in part.
You Might Also Be Interested In...
Regulatory Reporting and Accounting
BPI and IIB Comment on Federal Reserve Proposal to Revise FR Y-7Q Capital and Asset Report for Foreign Bank Organizations

Bank Capital and Stress Testing
DFAST 2022: Volatility, Capital Increases, and the Implications for the U.S Economy

Bank Capital and Stress Testing
BPI Statement on the Federal Reserve’s Release of the 2022 Stress Test Results

Bank Capital and Stress Testing
Potential Costs Of Banning Capital Distributions By Banks In Bad Times

Bank Capital and Stress Testing
A Modification to the Basel Committee’s Standardized Approach to Operational Risk

More Posts by This Author
Bank Capital and Stress Testing
DFAST 2022: Volatility, Capital Increases, and the Implications for the U.S Economy

Bank Activities and Structure
How Has the Size Distribution of Banks Evolved Over the Last 30 Years?

Bank Capital and Stress Testing
A Modification to the Basel Committee’s Standardized Approach to Operational Risk

Bank Capital and Stress Testing
On the Overcapitalization for Market Risk Under the U.S. Regulatory Framework
