6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

18
Integrated Balance Sheet Management 9 May 2013 Raj Murdia, Ernst & Young [email protected]

Upload: ron-cheshire

Post on 14-Jun-2015

120 views

Category:

Economy & Finance


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Integrated Balance Sheet Management

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Integrated Balance Sheet Management

9 May 2013 Raj Murdia, Ernst & Young

[email protected]

Page 2: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 2

Overview

► Regulatory reform, changes in Board risk appetite and shifts in the competitive landscape have significantly increased the complexity of balance sheet management.

► Traditional ALM focusing on interest rate risk in the banking book and capital attribution is evolving to dynamic balance sheet management, driving strategic business and risk management decisions at the highest levels in financial services organizations.

► Future state strategic balance sheet management will drive:

► Fundamental changes in the operating models of financial services organizations

► Rationalization and enhancements in data, technology and reporting

► Enhanced analytics to support balance sheet optimization and strategic planning given multiple binding constraints

► Implementation is complex, requiring sponsorship by the Board and executive management, as well as cross-functional participation from Finance, Risk and business lines.

Page 3: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 3

Traditional balance sheet management and current challenges

This document contains information in summary form and is therefore intended for general guidance only. It is not intended to be a substitute for detailed research or the exercise of professional judgment. Neither Ernst & Young LLP nor any other member of the global Ernst & Young organization can accept any responsibility for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any material in this document. On any specific matter, reference should be made to the appropriate advisor.

Page 4: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 4

Traditional balance sheet management

► Performed by corporate treasury with a focus on the banking book.

► Objective to fund plans delivered by business lines and manage associated IRR and FX risks.

► Input, rather than the driver of strategic plans

► Product pricing and performance management do not capture all liquidity risks and costs, particularly contingent risks.

► Data lacks sufficient granularity and frequency to meet emerging regulatory expectations.

► Silo-based governance, organization, risk analytics, data and technology infrastructure.

Long-Term

Funding

Trading Book Short-term

Funding

Banking Book

Core Capital (Including Retained

Earnings)

CR

CR

MR

LR

IRRBB

LR

MR LR

Operating models in many organizations make it difficult to provide the Board and senior management with a holistic view of the balance sheet. Silo-risk analysis can fail to capture inter-dependencies across risk categories and may not fully test the resilience of a bank’s balance sheet.

Page 5: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 5

Traditional planning model

Strategic planning in many organizations does not allow sufficient two-way flow of information between functions and focuses on aggregation of inputs, rather than dynamic analysis and optimization.

Management Committee, Board of Directors

Risk Management

Asset Liability Committee

Inte

rest R

ate

Ris

k

Liq

uid

ity R

isk

Cre

dit R

isk

Opera

tional R

isk

Oth

er

Ma

teria

l R

isks

Fu

nd

ing

Inve

stm

en

t P

ort

folio

Mg

mt.

Ma

teria

l R

isk A

sse

ssm

en

t Capital

Planning

Stress

Testing

B/S Forecast I/S Forecast

Enterprise Risk Committee

Treasury Planning

Lines of Business

Fu

nd

s T

ran

sfe

r P

ricin

g

Page 6: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 6

Regulatory considerations for balance sheet management The Regulatory reform landscape is complex and dynamic. Interrelated regulatory requirements impact functional areas across the organization.

Balance Sheet Management

FDIC IDI Rule and

DFA 165(d) resolution

plans

Basel “2.5” trading

book capital

CCAR – stress

testing and capital plans

US SIFI Enhanced prudential standards

NPR

SR 10-1 Interagency

guidance IRR

SR 11-7 Interagency

guidance Model Risk

Basel III, SR10-6, RN

10-57 on Funding, Liquidity

Risk

Funding & Liquidity

Management

Cash Management

Operations & Technology

Capital Management

Capital Markets

Investment Management

Finance

ALM & Hedging

Capital Management

Enterprise Risk/CRO Credit Risk

Market Risk

Internal Audit

Lines of Business

Financial Planning

Living Will

Page 7: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 7

Gap to crisis

Capital and liquidity ratios

time

Stress buffer

Recovery zone

Resolution

Failure threshold

Crisis threshold (capital or liquidity event)

Lower end of operating range

Current Capital/liquidity ratios

Upper end of operating range

Stress testing Analyze potential impact of stress scenarios and risk mitigation options

Further stress testing Identify potential crisis/failure scenarios; demonstrate strength of capital/liquidity position

Recovery plan Plan for potential recovery actions to address severe stresses

Resolution plan Support efficient legal entity resolution activities after failure

Risk appetite calibration The amount of risk that the firm is willing to accept given target capital/liquidity position

Risk capacity analysis The maximum amount of risk that can be borne given current capital/liquidity levels

Business Planning requirements

Risk appetite inputs

Living will

Target operating range

Increasing scope for analysis and decision making

Business decisions need to be evaluated and their implications considered not only in BAU or Stress scenarios, but in the extreme stress (Recovery and Resolution) scenarios as well.

Page 8: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 8

Funding and liquidity strategies to address LCR binding constraint:

Overlay capital considerations:

Illustrative example: liquidity and capital considerations

► Strategy 3 may be the lowest-cost strategy today to achieve LCR compliance, but requires significant debt issuance, indicates a low risk-appetite as leverage ratio becomes binding and weak return profile to the shareholder

► Strategy 1 and Strategy 2 reduce risk-weighted assets but at the expense of negative carry

Strategy 1: shift investment portfolio mix Strategy 2: shift asset mix Strategy 3: balance sheet expansion

► Increase level 1 securities and reduce LCR level 1 non-eligible securities

► Increase level 1 securities and decrease loans

► Increase level 1 securities and issue 3-year long-term debt to fund the security purchase

Investment portfolio security yield:

3.1% Yield on loan portfolio: 4.5% 3-year note coupon (treasury + 130-160 bps)

1.6%–1.9%

5-year treasury rate: 0.6% 5-year treasury rate: 0.6% 5-year treasury rate: 0.6%

Investment shift impact: 250 bps Asset shift impact: 390 bps Negative carry on level 1 assets

100 bps– 130 bps

► More complex situations would involve decisions between disparate portfolios across the entire balance sheet; e.g., investing in mortgage loans vs. leveraged leases

Page 9: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 9

Need for a new strategic balance sheet management operating model

This document contains information in summary form and is therefore intended for general guidance only. It is not intended to be a substitute for detailed research or the exercise of professional judgment. Neither Ernst & Young LLP nor any other member of the global Ernst & Young organization can accept any responsibility for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining from action as a result of any material in this document. On any specific matter, reference should be made to the appropriate advisor.

Page 10: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 10

Capital planning Liquidity forecasting

Stress tests RRP Stress tests CFP

Risk profile: how much risk are we exposed to? Risk appetite: what risks should we take?

Credit Market

Operational

Liquidity

Reputational

New business and product approval

Measuring risk-based returns

Risk within strategic planning

Board-approved risk appetite

Internal controls

Data and IT capabilities

Enterprise risk profile

• Enterprise-wide view of risk

• Emerging risk identification

Regulatory constraints

• Minimum capital and liquidity ratios

• Other prudential requirements

Linkage of risk-taking and regulatory requirements with strategic goals

• Challenging business environment

• Leverage ratio vs. risk based capital (RBC) continuum – risk-return reward, size of balance sheet

• Focus on counter-cyclicality and tight underwriting

• Trade-off between higher liquidity requirement, earnings, leverage and RWA

Aggregation

Concentrations

Correlation

Risk capacity: how much risk can we take?

Internal risk-based view of capital and liquidity

Regulatory minimum capital and liquidity

Integrated balance sheet analysis

Enhanced balance sheet analytics and decision making

Resilience constraints

• Internal operating range for risk and capital

• Contingency and recovery options

Optimizing balance sheet strategies considering regulatory constraints, risk appetite and business objectives requires integrated and dynamic analysis.

Page 11: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 11

New operating model Enhanced governance, functional, data and infrastructure capabilities

Board of directors and board-level risk committees ► Establish risk appetite and responsibility for risk governance and approval (e.g., approval of capital plan, establishment of liquidity risk

tolerance) ► Active and interventionist role for the board-level risk committee with respect to the oversight of management risk-taking

Risk functions (CRO) ► Capabilities to support enhanced reqmts. for:

► Enterprise risk monitoring, aggregation and reporting capabilities and risk committee reporting

► Liquidity risk monitoring and reporting ► Daily counterparty exposure identification, calculation

and monitoring; monthly counterparty exposure reporting

► Capital and liquidity stress testing

Finance functions (CFO) ► Capabilities to support enhanced requirements for:

► Liquidity management requirements — detailed cash flow projections, monthly stress testing, contingency funding plan; liquidity monitoring against limits including intraday liquidity and collateral, formal documentation of assumptions

► Formal review of liquidity management effectiveness ► Increased regulatory reporting expectations — daily cash flow,

monthly reports on single counterparty exposures ► Capital plan and stress testing

Data management and IT infrastructure ► Build sustainable data provisioning and underlying architecture to support enhanced capabilities ► Significantly increase the granularity and timeliness of reporting (e.g., legal entity, daily). Develop single “golden” sources of data at

enterprise level. Focus on aggregation (inc. aggregate counterparty positions) and finance and risk data reconciliation

Executive management and business strategy ► Strategic analysis on the viability of certain products and activities against regulatory and market constraints ► Active role in investment decisions supporting regulatory spend (e.g., prioritization, first-mover advantage) ► Enterprise-level governance over implementation/transformation projects and workstreams

Liquidity risk management

CP exposure monitoring

Stress testing

Capital and funding plans

Lines of business ► Shaping business strategy and implementation approach related to addressing the financial reform agenda ► Ability to assess businesses against multiple constraints — multiple risk-based capital ratios, liquidity ratio, leverage ratio — and business

performance metrics

Audit — Effectiveness of reform projects. Impact on audit universe, new business models and risk/compliance processes

Enterprise compliance — Ability to manage as an integrated, firm-wide management discipline

Page 12: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 12

The Scorecard approach for more complex tradeoffs across entire balance sheet

VS.

Business Model

Asset Liability

Management

Regulatory Capital

Market and

Shareholder View

Loss Rates

+

1 +

Risk (Volatility and

Correlation)

PPE and NIAT

MORTGAGE SERVICING RIGHTS

PPE/OS = $X, NIAT/OS = $X (seasoned)

Short Payback

± Basel 1: 100% RW

Basel 2: Low given asset quality

Liabilities easily hedged with

balance guarantee swaps +

+

-

+

- Basel 3: Punitive treatment (only 10%

allowed vs. 90% earlier)

High RoE

Short Payback

- Daily hedging using TBAs etc.

Hedging and Acct. operationally demanding

Natural alignment and natural hedge

with origination

Considered inferior collateral loans

Very Low: <1% (Through-the-Cycle)

+ Low volatility

Imperfect correlation with other assets

- Considered risky due to volatility

“Free” money

MtM volatility flows through earnings ±

SCORECARD

N/A

Natural hedge with HFI Portfolio

High volatility ±

2

1

2

4

3

4

PRIME AUTO ASSETS

Ra

nk

-o

rdere

d

+ RoE and Economic

Profit

High: X% Average (post-hedge): Y% ± 3

Liquidity / Impact

on LCR, NSFR + Short dated; Relatively easy to sell

Impact on LCR using stable funding: X% - Illiquid, difficult to dispose

Impact on LCR using stable funding: X% 5

Qu

an

tita

tive

Q

uali

tati

ve

±

► Balanced Scorecard articulates goals and constraints and provides transparency and objectivity in decision making.

► Forms the basis for tradeoff decisions, allocating B/S and setting targets at high level LoB segments

► Composed of a few critical and meaningful metrics that do not change too frequently

Illustrative example

Page 13: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 13

Traceability to validate treasury infrastructure

Target operating model (TOM)

Outlines key functional components and processes

Business requirements (BRD)

Describes the functional and non-functional requirements

Balance sheet

Granular logical chart of accounts

Data groupings

Logical grouping for data requirements

Reporting requirements

Describes management and regulatory requirements considering target state for reporting

Product hierarchy

Groups charts of accounts in platform to optimize system functionalities (e.g., dimensions)

Data requirements

Consolidates the data elements needed to produce management and regulatory reporting

Solution design

End-to-end solution design (sourcing to reporting)

Logical data model

End-to-end solution design (sourcing to reporting)

Data dictionary

Description for product and data elements

Business rules

Outlines functional and technical rules

Business drivers

1. How do I know that business requirements are complete and at the right granularity?

2. How do key business inputs translate into technical delivery and can actually produce intended results?

3. How do I think about balance sheet management, capital, funding and liquidity in a structured way?

4. How do I ensure complete balance sheet and product coverage?

Traceability benefits

1. Clear auditabillity from regulatory requirements to solution implementation

2. A structured approach to phasing business benefits

3. Comprehensive balance sheet and product coverage

4. Clear mapping to delivery inputs (e.g., data model, interfaces, testing)

Page 14: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 14

Traceability example

1. Business requirement: Automated reporting solution capable of producing the Fed 4G Report

2. Reporting line item: 9.10 Cash Balance at Federal Reserve

3. Business rule Product Code = Interest Earning Balance with Other Banks OR Non Interest Earning Balance with Other Banks AND Party Long Name = Central bank AND …

5. SQL to fulfill Line 9.10 SELECT: Balance Amount FROM: Position Fact, Instrument Dimension, Party Dimension, Purpose Dimension WHERE (Instrument Dimension.Product Code = Interest Earning Balance with Other Banks OR Non-Interest Earning Balance with Other Banks) AND …

4. Data definition Product Code Party Long Name Balance Amount

Business/regulatory needs Demonstrated linkage to reporting solutions

Business requirements and data requirements are not enough; traceability formally documents the mapping of requirements to infrastructure and the reports generated by treasury.

Page 15: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 15

Accountability and governance Treasury data steward establishes governing body, roles and accountabilities and defines data reconciliation strategy

Data provisioning (sourcing) Consolidate data sourcing from LOB by product group through identification of authorized sources, validation and gap closure; elimination of redundancy; and alignment to enterprise data provisioning points

Data standardization, cleansing and storage

► Integrated data model leveraging common data sources for market and security master data

► Scalable data model that supports incremental functional components

► Multiple periods of stored production data for user access

► Controlled management of standard reference data, metadata, reconciliation and data model

Analytics and reporting

► Central function to support internal and external reporting of treasury risk

► Flexibility to compute and/or import contractual, behavioral and stressed cash flows for internal risk or statutory/ regulatory reporting

► Shared stress-testing strategies and scenario analysis capabilities across risk categories

► Multi-dimensional reporting with drill-down capabilities at the most granular level and ability to view risk measures across line of business, legal entities, currencies and counterparties

High-level target state architecture

Traceability

Measurement system

Treasury, risk and finance

users

Data management steward

Upstream accountability of data Policy and standards Reconciliation, testing and attestation

Line of business } Provisioning point

Line of business } Provisioning point

Line of business } Provisioning point

Loans

Debt/hedges

Traded products

Deposits

Off-balance sheet

Treasury data warehouse

Analytical/ calculation engines

Capital

Planning

ALM

Liquidity

Stress testing

Cash flows

Analytics/ reporting framework

Regulatory reporting

MIS tools

Data visualization

Report generation Personnel

Personnel

Personnel

4 3 2 1

1

2 3 3 4 4

Page 16: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 16

Program approach and governance A structured approach to defining a target state operating model and implementation road map

Iterative target state development methodology

Strategic architecture

Functional and IT road map

Gap assessment

Business strategy

Conduct applicability assessment of

regulations Tactical

architecture

Inputs

Perform current state assessment

Perform gap assessment

Develop target state

Establish ongoing management operating model

Leading practice considerations and

benchmarking

BAU target operating model

Strategic treasury improvement program governance

Strategic functional and IT

road map

Functional and data requirements

Target operating model

► The creation of a program governance structure provides oversight to planning and implementation activities, including fine-tuning the approach due to regulatory updates and new requirements. It also provides a framework to evaluate tactical initiatives in terms of the planned strategic architecture limiting rework.

Increased clarity of regulations and new regulations

As new requirements emerge or existing ones change, the roadmap and target state will update iteratively throughout this process.

Outputs

Strategic architecture

Interim architecture

Page 17: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 17

Benefits of strategic balance sheet management

► Allows better management of the firm in this complex environment with changing competitive and regulatory landscape.

► Facilitates tight integration of key stakeholders, early and all along the decision making process.

► Makes possible dynamic analysis and reporting across risk factors using strategic infrastructure.

► Facilitates optimization across entire balance sheet, considering multiple constraints and strategic goals.

► Enhances alignment of LoB behavior with strategic goals.

► Enhances profitability by optimizing funding and IT costs.

► Enables stronger governance of Balance Sheet decisions and performance evaluation and enhance accountability by clarifying roles and responsibilities.

► Facilitates key supervisory risk management objectives.

Page 18: 6038 5401 raj murdia_presentation

Page 18

Ernst & Young

Assurance | Tax | Transactions | Advisory

About Ernst & Young Ernst & Young is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction and advisory services. Worldwide, our 167,000 people are united by our shared values and an unwavering commitment to quality. We make a difference by helping our people, our clients and our wider communities achieve their potential.

Ernst & Young refers to the global organization of member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. For more information about our organization, please visit www.ey.com.

Ernst & Young LLP is a client-serving member firm of

Ernst & Young Global Limited operating in the US.

© 2012 Ernst & Young LLP. All Rights Reserved.

SCORE No. XXXXXX

1210-1396753

This publication contains information in summary form

and is therefore intended for general guidance only. It is

not intended to be a substitute for detailed research or

the exercise of professional judgment. Neither

Ernst & Young LLP nor any other member of the global

Ernst & Young organization can accept any responsibility

for loss occasioned to any person acting or refraining

from action as a result of any material in this publication.

On any specific matter, reference should be made to the

appropriate advisor.