Updated 21/12/2024
In force

Version from: 09/07/2024
Amendments (1)
There is currently no Level 2 legal act based on or specifying Article 377.
Search within this legal act

Article 377 - Requirements for an internal model for correlation trading

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 377

Requirements for an internal model for correlation trading

1.  
Competent authorities shall grant permission to use an internal model for the own funds requirement for the correlation trading portfolio instead of the own funds requirement in accordance with Article 338 to institutions that are allowed to use an internal model for specific risk of debt instruments and that meet the requirements in paragraphs 2 to 6 of this Article and in Article 367(1) and (3), Article 368, Article 369(1) and points (a), (b), (c), (e) and (f) of Article 370.
2.  
Institutions shall use this internal model to calculate a number which adequately measures all price risks at the 99,9 % confidence interval over a time horizon of one year under the assumption of a constant level of risk, and adjusted where appropriate to reflect the impact of liquidity, concentrations, hedging and optionality. Institutions shall calculate this number at least weekly.
3.  

The following risks shall be adequately captured by the model referred to in paragraph 1:

(a) 

the cumulative risk arising from multiple defaults, including different ordering of defaults, in tranched products;

(b) 

credit spread risk, including the gamma and cross-gamma effects;

(c) 

volatility of implied correlations, including the cross effect between spreads and correlations;

(d) 

basis risk, including both of the following:

(i) 

the basis between the spread of an index and those of its constituent single names;

(ii) 

the basis between the implied correlation of an index and that of bespoke portfolios;

(e) 

recovery rate volatility, as it relates to the propensity for recovery rates to affect tranche prices;

(f) 

to the extent the comprehensive risk measure incorporates benefits from dynamic hedging, the risk of hedge slippage and the potential costs of rebalancing such hedges;

(g) 

any other material price risks of positions in the correlation trading portfolio.

4.  
An institution shall use sufficient market data within the model referred to in paragraph 1 in order to ensure that it fully captures the salient risks of those exposures in its internal approach in accordance with the requirements set out in this Article. It shall be able to demonstrate to the competent authority through back testing or other appropriate means that its model can appropriately explain the historical price variation of those products.

The institution shall have appropriate policies and procedures in place in order to separate the positions for which it holds permission to incorporate them in the own funds requirement in accordance with this Article from other positions for which it does not hold such permission.

5.  
With regard to the portfolio of all the positions incorporated in the model referred to in paragraph 1, the institution shall regularly apply a set of specific, predetermined stress scenarios. Such stress scenarios shall examine the effects of stress to default rates, recovery rates, credit spreads, basis risk, correlations and other relevant risk factors on the correlation trading portfolio. The institution shall apply stress scenarios at least weekly and report at least quarterly to the competent authorities the results, including comparisons with the institution's own funds requirement in accordance with this Article. Any instances where the stress test results materially exceed the own funds requirement for the correlation trading portfolio shall be reported to the competent authorities in a timely manner. EBA shall issue guidelines on the application of stress scenarios for the correlation trading portfolio.
6.  
The internal model shall conservatively assess the risk arising from less liquid positions and positions with limited price transparency under realistic market scenarios. In addition, the internal model shall meet minimum data standards. Proxies shall be appropriately conservative and may be used only where available data is insufficient or is not reflective of the true volatility of a position or portfolio.