- Introduction to Basel Capital Accord
- The 1988 Basel Accord (Basel I)
- Basel Accord – 1996 Market Risk Amendment
- Why Basel I (1988 Accord) Needed to be Replaced?
- Overview of Basel II Accord
- Basel II – Capital Charge for Credit Risk
- Basel II - Standardised Approach for Credit Risk
- Basel II - Internal Ratings Based (IRB) Approach

# Basel II - Internal Ratings Based (IRB) Approach

This approach involves assigning risk weights based on the internal rating of the borrowers. The ratings exercise must fulfill certain criteria to the satisfaction of the regulator. There are two options available. They are Foundation approach and Advanced Approach.

In the IRB approaches, the bank’s internal assessment of key risk parameters serves as the primary input to capital computation. The key features of this approach are:

Capital charge computation is dependent on probability of default (PD), Loss given at default (LGD), exposure at default (ED) and effective maturity (M).

The IRB approach computes the capital requirement of each exposure directly.

Banks need to categorize banking book exposures into broad classes of assets. The classes of assets are corporates, sovereigns, banks, retail and equity. Within corporates and retail, there are sub-clauses, which are separately identified.

Risk weighted assets are derived from the capital charge computation. Banks must use the risk weight functions provided by Basel II.

IRB approach does not allow banks to determine all elements.

Foundation and Advanced approaches differ primarily in terms of the inputs that are provided by the bank on its own estimates and those that are specified by the supervisor.

Under the Foundation approach, as a general rule, banks provide their own estimates of PD – probability of default and rely on supervisory estimates for other risk components.

Under the advanced approach, banks provide more of their own estimates of PD, LGD, EAD and M.

Banks adopting IRB approach are expected to continue to use the same. A voluntary return to earlier or lower approach is permitted only in exceptional cases with prior permission from the supervisor.

The four input parameters for IRB approaches are summarized below:

Input Parameter | Foundation IRB | Advanced IRB | |

Probability of default (PD) | Provided by bank based on own estimates | Provided by bank based on own estimates | |

Loss given default (LGD) | Supervisory values set by the Committee | Provided by bank based on own estimates | |

Exposure at default (EAD) | Supervisory values set by the Committee | Provided by bank based on own estimates | |

Maturity | Supervisory values set by the CommitteeorAt national discretion, provided by bank based on own estimates (with an allowance to exclude certain exposures) | Provided by bank based on own estimates (with an allowance to exclude certain exposures) |

This approach involves assigning risk weights based on the internal rating of the borrowers. The ratings exercise must fulfill certain criteria to the satisfaction of the regulator. There are two options available. They are Foundation approach and Advanced Approach.

In the IRB approaches, the bank’s internal assessment of key risk parameters serves as the primary input to capital computation. The key features of this approach are:

Capital charge computation is dependent on probability of default (PD), Loss given at default (LGD), exposure at default (ED) and effective maturity (M).

The IRB approach computes the capital requirement of each exposure directly.

Banks need to categorise banking book exposures into broad classes of assets. The classes of assets are corporates, sovereigns, banks, retail and equity. Within corporates and retail, there are sub-clauses, which are separately identified.

Risk weighted assets are derived from the capital charge computation. Banks must use the risk weight functions provided by Basel II.

IRB approach does not allow banks to determine all elements.

Foundation and Advanced approaches differ primarily in terms of the inputs that are provided by the bank on its own estimates and those that are specified by the supervisor.

Under the Foundation approach, as a general rule, banks provide their own estimates of PD – probability of default and rely on supervisory estimates for other risk components.

Under the advanced approach, banks provide more of their own estimates of PD, LGD, EAD and M.

Banks adopting IRB approach are expected to continue to use the same. A voluntary return to earlier or lower approach is permitted only in exceptional cases with prior permission from the supervisor.

## Data Science in Finance: 9-Book Bundle

Master R and Python for financial data science with our comprehensive bundle of 9 ebooks.

### What's Included:

- Getting Started with R
- R Programming for Data Science
- Data Visualization with R
- Financial Time Series Analysis with R
- Quantitative Trading Strategies with R
- Derivatives with R
- Credit Risk Modelling With R
- Python for Data Science
- Machine Learning in Finance using Python

Each book includes PDFs, explanations, instructions, data files, and R code for all examples.

Get the Bundle for $39 (Regular $57)## Free Guides - Getting Started with R and Python

Enter your name and email address below and we will email you the guides for R programming and Python.