- Question ID
-
2015_1859
- Legal act
- Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
- Topic
- Credit risk
- Article
-
143
- Paragraph
-
5
- Subparagraph
-
3
- COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs/Recommendations
- Regulation (EU) No 529/2014 - RTS on materiality of extensions and changes in the advanced approaches (IRB and AMA)
- Article/Paragraph
-
Annex I, part 2, paragraph 2
- Name of institution / submitter
-
Volvofinans Bank AB
- Country of incorporation / residence
-
Sweden
- Type of submitter
-
Consultancy firm
- Subject matter
-
When should an external rating be considered as a primary factor determining an internal rating assignment
- Question
-
Concerning the practical application of the RTS on materiality: When should an external rating be considered as a 'primary factor' determining an internal rating assignment, and by what measure is the relative importance of the different variables comprising an internal model for credit risk to be evaluated?
- Background on the question
-
According to Annex I, part 2, section 1, paragraph 2(e) in the abovementioned RTS, the introduction or withdrawal of an external rating as a primary factor determining an internal rating assignment should be considered as a change requiring competent authorities' approval (i.e. ‘material’). However, it is not specified what is meant by 'primary factor' in this context. Neither is it explained how the relative importance of the different variables included in an internal model for credit risk is to be evaluated. For example, when an external rating is included as one of the risk drivers in a statistical scoring model, it is usually found to be a 'strong' variable (this can be evaluated by several different means, such as information value ordering or by comparing the Wald Chi-2 test statistics). Obviously, if the external rating turns out to be a very dominating variable (say > 90% of the total weight in the model) it should be considered primary. And if it turns out to be the least important variable it should perhaps not be considered primary. But what if the external rating is found to be the second or third most important variable in the model?
- Submission date
- Final publishing date
-
- Final answer
-
The EBA does not aim to decide on quantitative criteria to determine when an external rating is considered as 'primary factor' in determining an internal rating assignment.
Given the variety of models used to combine the numerous factors used to determine the assignment to grade or pool (e.g. weighted sums, scoring models etc.) and the large variety of potential metrics for assessing the relevance of different factors, institutions should assess themselves if, in their algorithms and procedures for internal rating assignment, the external ratings should be considered a primary factor. This assessment by institutions must be well-explained and justified in order that an external rating can be considered as not 'primary'.
Further, pursuant to Title 1, Article 3(4) of the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 529/2014 on assessing the materiality of extensions and changes of the IRB and AMA approaches, in case of doubt, institutions shall assign extensions and changes to the category of the highest potential materiality, and so in this case, shall assign external ratings as 'primary'.
- Status
-
Final Q&A
- Answer prepared by
-
Answer prepared by the EBA.
- Note to Q&A
-
Update 26.03.2021: This Q&A has been reviewed in the light of the changes introduced to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) and continues to be relevant.
Disclaimer
The Q&A refers to the provisions in force on the day of their publication. The EBA does not systematically review published Q&As following the amendment of legislative acts. Users of the Q&A tool should therefore check the date of publication of the Q&A and whether the provisions referred to in the answer remain the same.