Risks 2014, 2(1), 25-48; doi:10.3390/risks2010025

An Academic Response to Basel 3.5

1email, 2email, 3email, 4,* email and 2email
Received: 25 November 2013; in revised form: 9 February 2014 / Accepted: 17 February 2014 / Published: 27 February 2014
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Risk Management Techniques for Catastrophic and Heavy-Tailed Risks)
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract: Recent crises in the financial industry have shown weaknesses in the modeling of Risk-Weighted Assets (RWAs). Relatively minor model changes may lead to substantial changes in the RWA numbers. Similar problems are encountered in the Value-at-Risk (VaR)-aggregation of risks. In this article, we highlight some of the underlying issues, both methodologically, as well as through examples. In particular, we frame this discussion in the context of two recent regulatory documents we refer to as Basel 3.5.
Keywords: Basel 3.5; risk-weighted assets; Value-at-Risk; expected shortfall; model uncertainty; robustness; backtesting
PDF Full-text Download PDF Full-Text [375 KB, uploaded 27 February 2014 13:20 CET]

Export to BibTeX |

MDPI and ACS Style

Embrechts, P.; Puccetti, G.; Rüschendorf, L.; Wang, R.; Beleraj, A. An Academic Response to Basel 3.5. Risks 2014, 2, 25-48.

AMA Style

Embrechts P, Puccetti G, Rüschendorf L, Wang R, Beleraj A. An Academic Response to Basel 3.5. Risks. 2014; 2(1):25-48.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Embrechts, Paul; Puccetti, Giovanni; Rüschendorf, Ludger; Wang, Ruodu; Beleraj, Antonela. 2014. "An Academic Response to Basel 3.5." Risks 2, no. 1: 25-48.

Risks EISSN 2227-9091 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert