Firms» risk management practices Supervisory responses
9
Network analysis
DIRECTION DE LA STABILITE FINANCIERE
10
Network analysis
DIRECTION DE LA STABILITE FINANCIERE
The regulator will be able to compute such measures of systemic risk impact if institutions are required to disclose, not only an aggregate risk figure such
as VaR, but also their risk exposures above a given threshold to all counterparties.
This will enable the regulator to map the counterparty network
Co-risk Analysis
Capturefinancial institutions» co-dependence risk arising from direct and indirect linkages from publicly available data.
Indirect linkages arise from exposure to common risk factors such as reliance on wholesale funding markets, similar portfolios, and so on.
Thus, this work can complement network analysis. Under efficient markets, pricing of indirect linkages should result in co-move-
ments of institutions» equity prices and credit risk measures, such as CDS spreads, Moody»s KMV Expected Default Frequencies, Bond Spreads.
Nodes are scaled by Total External Assets + Total External Liabilities for each node, and links between nodes i and j by Total External Assetsij + Total External
Liabilitiesij GDPi+ GDPj .
The data are developed and analyzed in Kubulec and Sa 2008.
11
There are other modelsº
DIRECTION DE LA STABILITE FINANCIERE
12
Summary of various methodologies1
DIRECTION DE LA STABILITE FINANCIERE
1 3 Chan-Lau, Espinosa and Solé 2009 2 Giesecke and Kim 2009
4 Segoviano Goodhart 2009
WeaknessesConditions When Measure May Be Misleading
Network Simulations
1
Default Intensity Model
2
Co-Risk Analysis
3
Time-Varying Multivariate Density, Distress Dependence, and Tail Risk
4
Policy Implications
Does not incorporate institution» endogenous response to distress events. Data limitations may
include lack of off-balance-sheet exposure information.
Reduce form model. Usefulness is undermined by factors that affect
market efficiency. CDS may overstate objective default probabilities.
Help policymakers identify 1 institutions whose failure might trigger domino effects; and 2 institutions most
vulnerable to shocks stemming from other institutions» failure. Allows elaboration of potential contagion paths
following financial distress events. Inform policymakers abaout the likelihood of tail event
arising from both direct and indirect financial linkages. Provide policymakers with information to identify not
only how common risk are evolving, but where spillovers might most easily develop and how distress in
specific institution can affect other institution. Provide policymakers with information to identify not
only how common risk are evolving, but where spillovers might most easily develop and how distress in
specific institution can affect other institution. Source: IMF staff.
13