Today financial services institutions must meet the standards for data quality attestation by the FFEIC regulators of risk reporting. This paper discusses the platform and domain expertise needed to support the rigorous demands of commercial and retail risk reporting.
Published By: Tripwire
Published Date: Jun 30, 2009
Understand the issues addressed by the new international banking standard known as the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS or Basel II), and find out how Tripwire can help meet all requirements of Basel II compliance even before it becomes a worldwide banking regulation.
As today’s global marketplace becomes more sophisticated, the number and complexity of mission-critical financial transactions that companies conduct on a day-to-day basis continues to grow exponentially. Even small and mid-sized businesses are plagued by a rapidly increasing volume of financial processes that are highly
intricate and multi-faceted. These activities, while important, are administrative in nature and often distract staff from more strategic planning initiatives that directly impact company prosperity and growth. Additionally, as legislative pressures continue to grow, and the rules imposed by Sarbanes Oxley, BASEL II, and other regulations become more stringent, businesses need to find better ways to ensure compliance by effectively logging, tracking, auditing, and reporting their financial data.
This white paper will outline the components of the Banking Data Warehouse (BDW) and how they assist financial institutions to address the data modeling and data consolidation issues relating to the Basel II Capital Accord.
Banks and financial institutions have faced a spate of regulations centered on capital adequacy since the financial crisis started in 2008. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) initiated a series of reforms to strengthen risk, capital and liquidity rules across banks. Among the important changes recommended are new rules for calculating Tier I and Tier II capital and the inclusion of additional risk measurement components for market risk, liquidity risk and counterparty risk. Despite these changes, a key drawback of the Basel framework is its focus on historical capital adequacy. While being useful, it does not help assess the impact of stress events on banks from an ex-ante basis. Hence regulatory agencies in several jurisdictions have mandated banks to define a forward-looking capital plan that incorporates stress scenarios.
The financial crisis that began in 2007 highlighted the major shortcomings of the regulatory framework around minimum capital requirements and liquidity requirements. In response, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision made substantial revisions to its guidelines - specifically, by including more demanding capital and liquidity requirements now commonly referred to as Basel III framework. National banking authorities around the world are adopting the new Basel III framework as a way to eliminate systemic liquidity risk and promote greater transparency of risk management practices.
Credit Union Times is the nation's leading independent source for breaking news and analysis for credit union leaders. For more than 20 years, Credit Union Times has set the standard for editorial excellence and ethical, straight-forward reporting.