Updated 20/11/2024
In force

Version from: 09/07/2024
Amendments (7)
There is currently no Level 2 legal act based on or specifying Article 273.
Search within this legal act

Article 273 - Methods for calculating the exposure value

Attention! This article will be amended on 01/01/2025. Please consult Regulation 2024/1623 to review the changes that will be made to the article.

Article 273

Methods for calculating the exposure value

1.  
Institutions shall calculate the exposure value for the contracts listed in Annex II on the basis of one of the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 in accordance with this Article.

An institution which does not meet the conditions set out in Article 273a(1) shall not use the method set out in Section 4. An institution which does not meet the conditions set out in Article 273a(2) shall not use the method set out in Section 5.

Institutions may use in combination the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 on a permanent basis within a group. A single institution shall not use in combination the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 on a permanent basis.

2.  

Where permitted by the competent authorities in accordance with Article 283(1) and (2), an institution may determine the exposure value for the following items using the Internal Model Method set out in Section 6:

(a) 

the contracts listed in Annex II;

(c) 

securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions;

3.  

When an institution purchases protection through a credit derivative against a non-trading book exposure or against a counterparty risk exposure, it may calculate its own funds requirement for the hedged exposure in accordance with either of the following:

(a) 

Articles 233 to 236;

(b) 

in accordance with Article 153(3), or Article 183, where permission has been granted in accordance with Article 143.

The exposure value for CCR for those credit derivatives shall be zero, unless an institution applies the approach in point (h)(ii) of Article 299(2).

4.  
Notwithstanding paragraph 3, an institution may choose consistently to include for the purposes of calculating own funds requirements for counterparty credit risk all credit derivatives not included in the trading book and purchased as protection against a non-trading book exposure or against a counterparty credit risk exposure where the credit protection is recognised under this Regulation.
5.  
Where credit default swaps sold by an institution are treated by an institution as credit protection provided by that institution and are subject to own funds requirement for credit risk of the underlying for the full notional amount, their exposure value for the purposes of CCR in the non-trading book shall be zero.
6.  
Under the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6, the exposure value for a given counterparty shall be equal to the sum of the exposure values calculated for each netting set with that counterparty.

By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, where one margin agreement applies to multiple netting sets with that counterparty and the institution is using one of the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 to calculate the exposure value of those netting sets, the exposure value shall be calculated in accordance with the relevant Section.

For a given counterparty, the exposure value for a given netting set of OTC derivative instruments listed in Annex II calculated in accordance with this Chapter shall be the greater of zero and the difference between the sum of exposure values across all netting sets with the counterparty and the sum of credit valuation adjustments for that counterparty being recognised by the institution as an incurred write-down. The credit valuation adjustments shall be calculated without taking into account any offsetting debit value adjustment attributed to the own credit risk of the firm that has been already excluded from own funds in accordance with point (c) of Article 33(1).

7.  
In calculating the exposure value in accordance with the methods set out in Sections 3, 4 and 5, institutions may treat two OTC derivative contracts included in the same netting agreement that are perfectly matching as if they were a single contract with a notional principal equal to zero.

For the purposes of the first subparagraph, two OTC derivative contracts are perfectly matching when they meet all the following conditions:

(a) 

their risk positions are opposite;

(b) 

their features, with the exception of the trade date, are identical;

(c) 

their cash flows fully offset each other.

8.  
Institutions shall determine the exposure value for exposures arising from long settlement transactions by any of the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 of this Chapter, regardless of which method the institution has chosen for treating OTC derivatives and repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions, and margin lending transactions. In calculating the own funds requirements for long settlement transactions, an institution that uses the approach set out in Chapter 3 may assign the risk weights under the approach set out in Chapter 2 on a permanent basis and irrespective of the materiality of those positions.
9.  
For the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 of this Chapter, institutions shall treat transactions where Specific Wrong-Way risk has been identified in accordance with Article 291(2), (4), (5), and (6).