# L_2022276EN.01004701.xml

| 26.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 276/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 276/47

---

COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) 2022/2059

of 14 June 2022

supplementing Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the technical details of back-testing and profit and loss attribution requirements under Articles 325bf and 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of 26 June 2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on prudential requirements for credit institutions and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (1), and in particular Article 325bf(9), third subparagraph, and Article 325bg(4), third subparagraph, thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 325bf(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 requires institutions to count daily overshootings on the basis of back-testing of the hypothetical and actual changes in their portfolio’s value composed of all the positions assigned to their trading desks. Such back-testing is intended to assess, depending on the level at which it is performed, whether it is appropriate to calculate the own funds requirements for positions in a trading desk using the alternative internal model approach, and whether the own funds requirements associated with modellable risk factors are adequate. Article 325bf(4) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 requires institutions to use the end-of-day value of the portfolio as a starting point for such back-testing, including all adjustments, such as reserves or any valuation adjustment. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 325bf(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 requires institutions to count daily overshootings on the basis of back-testing of the hypothetical and actual changes in their portfolio’s value composed of all the positions assigned to their trading desks. Such back-testing is intended to assess, depending on the level at which it is performed, whether it is appropriate to calculate the own funds requirements for positions in a trading desk using the alternative internal model approach, and whether the own funds requirements associated with modellable risk factors are adequate. Article 325bf(4) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 requires institutions to use the end-of-day value of the portfolio as a starting point for such back-testing, including all adjustments, such as reserves or any valuation adjustment.

| (2) | In the back-testing of the value-at-risk number, some market risk effects that are not captured by the internal risk-measurement model should still be included in the actual changes in the portfolio’s value. Accordingly, all adjustments related to market risk, regardless of the frequency at which they are updated by institutions, should be included in the actual changes in the portfolio’s value. The back-testing of the value-at-risk number with the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value, however, should be performed under the assumption of a static portfolio. Therefore, institutions should include in the computation of such hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value only those adjustments that are calculated daily and that are included in the internal risk-measurement model. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In the back-testing of the value-at-risk number, some market risk effects that are not captured by the internal risk-measurement model should still be included in the actual changes in the portfolio’s value. Accordingly, all adjustments related to market risk, regardless of the frequency at which they are updated by institutions, should be included in the actual changes in the portfolio’s value. The back-testing of the value-at-risk number with the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value, however, should be performed under the assumption of a static portfolio. Therefore, institutions should include in the computation of such hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value only those adjustments that are calculated daily and that are included in the internal risk-measurement model.

| (3) | In some cases, it is possible that, due to the nature of an adjustment and due to the internal risk management applicable to that adjustment, such adjustment is computed across sets of positions that are assigned to more than one trading desks. To ensure harmonisation across the Union, institutions should be required, when calculating the actual and hypothetical changes in a trading desk’s portfolio value, to either recalculate such adjustment for each trading desk on the stand-alone basis of the positions assigned to the trading desk only, or, where specific conditions are met, to reflect the changes arising from such adjustment only in the context of the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(6) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. Accordingly, where institutions perform the end-of-day valuation process to derive the trading desks’ end-of-day portfolio values, they should not be allowed, when calculating hypothetical and actual changes at the trading desk level, to allocate the adjustment to the trading desks in a manner that is proportionate to each trading desks’ contribution to the value of the adjustment. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

In some cases, it is possible that, due to the nature of an adjustment and due to the internal risk management applicable to that adjustment, such adjustment is computed across sets of positions that are assigned to more than one trading desks. To ensure harmonisation across the Union, institutions should be required, when calculating the actual and hypothetical changes in a trading desk’s portfolio value, to either recalculate such adjustment for each trading desk on the stand-alone basis of the positions assigned to the trading desk only, or, where specific conditions are met, to reflect the changes arising from such adjustment only in the context of the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(6) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. Accordingly, where institutions perform the end-of-day valuation process to derive the trading desks’ end-of-day portfolio values, they should not be allowed, when calculating hypothetical and actual changes at the trading desk level, to allocate the adjustment to the trading desks in a manner that is proportionate to each trading desks’ contribution to the value of the adjustment.

| (4) | The profit and loss attribution requirement laid down in Article 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 has a prominent role in ensuring that the theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value are sufficiently close. The statistical tests included in the international standards developed by the Basel Committee for Banking and Supervision, the Spearman correlation coefficient and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric, to operationalise the profit and loss attribution requirement are appropriate for that purpose and should therefore be used by institutions. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The profit and loss attribution requirement laid down in Article 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 has a prominent role in ensuring that the theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value are sufficiently close. The statistical tests included in the international standards developed by the Basel Committee for Banking and Supervision, the Spearman correlation coefficient and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric, to operationalise the profit and loss attribution requirement are appropriate for that purpose and should therefore be used by institutions.

| (5) | In the international standards, it is laid down that institutions should satisfy an additional capital requirement where the theoretical and hypothetical changes in the value of trading desks’ portfolios are not sufficiently close. In that situation, institutions should be required to calculate and report to competent authorities that additional capital requirement for those trading desks. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

In the international standards, it is laid down that institutions should satisfy an additional capital requirement where the theoretical and hypothetical changes in the value of trading desks’ portfolios are not sufficiently close. In that situation, institutions should be required to calculate and report to competent authorities that additional capital requirement for those trading desks.

| (6) | When reporting the profit and loss attribution results in accordance with Article 325az(2), point (d), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions should also highlight where the hypothetical changes and theoretical changes to the value of a trading desk’s portfolio materially differ. This should help institutions to identify potential deficiencies in the calculation of the theoretical changes. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

When reporting the profit and loss attribution results in accordance with Article 325az(2), point (d), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions should also highlight where the hypothetical changes and theoretical changes to the value of a trading desk’s portfolio materially differ. This should help institutions to identify potential deficiencies in the calculation of the theoretical changes.

| (7) | When assessing compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement, theoretical changes in a portfolio’s value are compared against hypothetical changes which are calculated under the assumption of a static portfolio. That comparison aims at identifying the materiality of differences in the valuation processes of the institution’s risk-measurement model producing the theoretical changes, and the valuation processes of the institution’s internal systems producing the hypothetical changes. To ensure that that comparison is not affected by changes in the composition of the portfolio, the theoretical changes to a portfolio’s value used in the profit and loss attribution requirement should also be calculated under the assumption of a static portfolio. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

When assessing compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement, theoretical changes in a portfolio’s value are compared against hypothetical changes which are calculated under the assumption of a static portfolio. That comparison aims at identifying the materiality of differences in the valuation processes of the institution’s risk-measurement model producing the theoretical changes, and the valuation processes of the institution’s internal systems producing the hypothetical changes. To ensure that that comparison is not affected by changes in the composition of the portfolio, the theoretical changes to a portfolio’s value used in the profit and loss attribution requirement should also be calculated under the assumption of a static portfolio.

| (8) | To ensure consistency with international standards, the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value that are calculated for the purpose of assessing compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement should be aligned with the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value, that an institution calculates for the purposes of the back-testing. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

To ensure consistency with international standards, the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value that are calculated for the purpose of assessing compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement should be aligned with the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value, that an institution calculates for the purposes of the back-testing.

| (9) | Differences between the valuation processes producing hypothetical and theoretical changes in a portfolio’s value may be due to omissions of certain risk factors in the risk-measurement model or simplifications of the risk-measurement model. Other differences may be due to misalignments in the data that an institution uses as inputs for determining its portfolios’ value. To avoid additional sources of discrepancies resulting from such differences in input data, institutions should be allowed to align the input data provided that some specific conditions are met. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

Differences between the valuation processes producing hypothetical and theoretical changes in a portfolio’s value may be due to omissions of certain risk factors in the risk-measurement model or simplifications of the risk-measurement model. Other differences may be due to misalignments in the data that an institution uses as inputs for determining its portfolios’ value. To avoid additional sources of discrepancies resulting from such differences in input data, institutions should be allowed to align the input data provided that some specific conditions are met.

| (10) | The frequency at which the results of the profit and loss attribution requirement are to be reported should be aligned to the frequency at which the modellability of the risk factors is assessed and the frequency at which the own funds requirements for market risk are reported. That way, institutions will be able to determine the own funds requirements for market risk based on consistent results for the back-testing requirements, the profit and loss attribution requirements and the assessment of modellability. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The frequency at which the results of the profit and loss attribution requirement are to be reported should be aligned to the frequency at which the modellability of the risk factors is assessed and the frequency at which the own funds requirements for market risk are reported. That way, institutions will be able to determine the own funds requirements for market risk based on consistent results for the back-testing requirements, the profit and loss attribution requirements and the assessment of modellability.

| (11) | The manner in which institutions should aggregate their total own funds requirements for market risk should be aligned with the international standards. Therefore, the aggregation formula should reflect the results of the profit and loss attribution requirement, including the additional capital requirement where theoretical and hypothetical changes are not sufficiently close. In addition, the aggregation formula should reflect a reduction in diversification benefits where the own funds requirements for a trading desk are calculated with the alternative standardised approach and not with the alternative internal model approach. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

The manner in which institutions should aggregate their total own funds requirements for market risk should be aligned with the international standards. Therefore, the aggregation formula should reflect the results of the profit and loss attribution requirement, including the additional capital requirement where theoretical and hypothetical changes are not sufficiently close. In addition, the aggregation formula should reflect a reduction in diversification benefits where the own funds requirements for a trading desk are calculated with the alternative standardised approach and not with the alternative internal model approach.

| (12) | In order to assist competent authorities to check compliance of institutions with this Regulation, institutions should be required to document their implementation of this Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

In order to assist competent authorities to check compliance of institutions with this Regulation, institutions should be required to document their implementation of this Regulation.

| (13) | The provisions of this Regulation are closely linked to each other, since they all deal with elements to be included in changes of a trading desk portfolio’s value for the purposes of calculating the own funds requirements for market risks using the alternative internal model approach. To ensure coherence between those provisions, which should enter into force at the same time, to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of those provisions and to ensure easy access to them by persons subject to the obligations set out within, it is desirable to include all the regulatory technical standards required by Article 325bf(9), third subparagraph, and Article 325bg(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 in a single Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The provisions of this Regulation are closely linked to each other, since they all deal with elements to be included in changes of a trading desk portfolio’s value for the purposes of calculating the own funds requirements for market risks using the alternative internal model approach. To ensure coherence between those provisions, which should enter into force at the same time, to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of those provisions and to ensure easy access to them by persons subject to the obligations set out within, it is desirable to include all the regulatory technical standards required by Article 325bf(9), third subparagraph, and Article 325bg(4), third subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 in a single Regulation.

| (14) | This Regulation is based on the draft regulatory technical standards submitted to the Commission by the EBA. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

This Regulation is based on the draft regulatory technical standards submitted to the Commission by the EBA.

| (15) | The EBA has conducted open public consultations on the draft regulatory technical standards on which this Regulation is based, analysed the potential related costs and benefits, and requested the advice of the Banking Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), |
| --- | --- |

(15)

The EBA has conducted open public consultations on the draft regulatory technical standards on which this Regulation is based, analysed the potential related costs and benefits, and requested the advice of the Banking Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2),

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

CHAPTER 1

TECHNICAL ELEMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE ACTUAL AND HYPOTHETICAL CHANGES IN A PORTFOLIO’S VALUE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE BACK-TESTING REQUIREMENTS

Section 1

Technical elements to be included in the actual changes in a portfolio’s value

Article 1

Technical elements to be included in the actual changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value for the back-testing requirements performed at trading desk level

1.   For the purposes of the trading desk back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate the actual changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value by using the same techniques, including the same pricing methods, model parametrisations and market data, as those used in the process used to calculate the end-of-day values (‘end-of-day valuation process’), including the results of the independent price verification referred to in Article 105(8) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

2.   When calculating the actual changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value, institutions shall reflect the changes in the value of that portfolio that are due to the passage of time.

3.   When calculating the actual changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value, institutions shall include in that value all those adjustments that have been considered in the end-of-day valuation process referred to in paragraph 1 and that are market risk related, with the exception of all of the following adjustments:

| (a) | credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution;

| (b) | adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (c) | additional value adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

additional value adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

4.   Institutions shall calculate the value of an adjustment as referred to in paragraph 3 on the basis of all positions that are assigned to the same trading desk. Institutions shall include changes in the adjustment’s value only on the date on which the adjustment is calculated.

5.   In addition to the exclusions laid down in paragraph 3, points (a), (b), and (c), institutions may exclude from the calculation of the actual changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value an adjustment that is calculated in the end-of-day valuation process across sets of positions assigned to more than one trading desk on a net basis, where all of the following conditions are met:

| (a) | that adjustment is, due to its nature, calculated on a net basis across sets of positions that are assigned to more than one trading desk; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

that adjustment is, due to its nature, calculated on a net basis across sets of positions that are assigned to more than one trading desk;

| (b) | the internal risk management of that adjustment is consistent with the level at which the adjustment is calculated; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the internal risk management of that adjustment is consistent with the level at which the adjustment is calculated;

| (c) | the institution concerned documents all of the following:






  (i) | the sets of positions across which the adjustment is calculated; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

the institution concerned documents all of the following:

(i)

the sets of positions across which the adjustment is calculated;

| (ii) | the reasoning underpinning the calculation of the adjustment across the sets of positions referred to in point (i); |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

the reasoning underpinning the calculation of the adjustment across the sets of positions referred to in point (i);

| (iii) | the justification for not calculating the adjustment on the basis of positions assigned to that trading desk only. |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

the justification for not calculating the adjustment on the basis of positions assigned to that trading desk only.

Article 2

Technical elements to be included in the actual changes in the portfolio’s value for the back-testing requirements performed at institution level

1.   For the purposes of the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(6) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate the actual changes in a portfolio’s value by using the same techniques, including the same pricing methods, model parametrisations and market data, as those used in the end-of-day valuation process, including the results of the independent price verification referred to in Article 105(8) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

2.   When calculating the actual changes in a portfolio’s value, institutions shall reflect the change in the value of that portfolio that are due to the passage of time.

3.   When calculating the actual changes in a portfolio’s value, institutions shall include in that value all the adjustments that have been considered in the end-of-day valuation process referred to in paragraph 1 and that are market risk related, with the exception of all of the following adjustments:

| (a) | credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution;

| (b) | adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (c) | additional value adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

additional value adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

4.   Institutions shall calculate the change in the value of the adjustments referred to in paragraph 3 on the basis of either of the following:

| (a) | all positions that are assigned to trading desks for which institutions calculate the own funds requirements for market risk in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

all positions that are assigned to trading desks for which institutions calculate the own funds requirements for market risk in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (b) | all positions subject to the own funds requirements for market risk. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

all positions subject to the own funds requirements for market risk.

5.   Institutions shall include changes in the adjustment’s value only on the date on which the adjustment is calculated.

Section 2

Technical elements to be included in the hypothetical changes in a portfolio’s value requirements

Article 3

Technical elements to be included in the hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value for the back-testing requirements performed at trading desk level

1.   For the purposes of the trading desk back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate the hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value by using the same techniques, including the same pricing methods, model parametrisations and market data, as those used in the end-of-day valuation process, without considering any fees and commissions.

2.   When calculating the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value, institutions shall reflect the changes in the value of the trading desk portfolio that are due to the passage of time in the same way they reflect such changes in the calculation of:

| (a) | the expected shortfall risk measure referred to in Article 325ba(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the expected shortfall risk measure referred to in Article 325ba(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (b) | the stress scenario risk measure referred to in Article 325bk of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the stress scenario risk measure referred to in Article 325bk of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

3.   When calculating the hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value, institutions shall include in that value all those adjustments that have been considered in the end-of-day valuation process referred to in paragraph 1 and that are market risk related, that are calculated on a daily basis, and that are included in the institution’s risk-measurement model, with the exception of all of the following adjustments:

| (a) | credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution;

| (b) | adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (c) | additional value adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

additional value adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

4.   Institutions shall calculate the value of an adjustment as referred to in paragraph 3 on the basis of all the positions assigned to that trading desk. Institutions shall include changes in an adjustment’s value based on a comparison between the end-of-day adjustment’s value and, assuming unchanged positions in the trading desk portfolio, the adjustment’s value at the end of the subsequent day.

5.   In addition to the exclusions laid down in paragraph 3, points (a), (b), and (c), institutions may also exclude from the calculation of the hypothetical changes to a trading’s desk portfolio’s value an adjustment that is calculated on a net basis in the end-of-day valuation process across sets of positions assigned to more than one trading desk, where all of the following conditions are met:

| (a) | that adjustment is, due to its nature, calculated on a net basis across sets of positions that are assigned to more than one trading desk; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

that adjustment is, due to its nature, calculated on a net basis across sets of positions that are assigned to more than one trading desk;

| (b) | the internal risk management of that adjustment is consistent with the level at which the adjustment is calculated; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the internal risk management of that adjustment is consistent with the level at which the adjustment is calculated;

| (c) | the institution documents all of the following:






  (i) | the sets of positions across which the adjustment is calculated; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

the institution documents all of the following:

(i)

the sets of positions across which the adjustment is calculated;

| (ii) | the reasoning underpinning the calculation of the adjustment across the sets of positions referred to in point (i); |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

the reasoning underpinning the calculation of the adjustment across the sets of positions referred to in point (i);

| (iii) | the justification for not calculating the adjustment on the basis of positions assigned to that trading desk only. |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

the justification for not calculating the adjustment on the basis of positions assigned to that trading desk only.

Article 4

Technical elements to be included in the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value for the back-testing requirements performed at institution level

1.   For the purposes of the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(6) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value by using the same techniques, including the same pricing methods, model parametrisations and market data, as those used in the end-of-day valuation process, without considering any fees and commissions.

2.   When calculating the hypothetical changes in the portfolio’s value, institutions shall reflect the changes in the value of the portfolio that are due to the passage of time in the same way they reflect such changes in the calculation of:

| (a) | the expected shortfall risk measure referred to in Article 325ba(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the expected shortfall risk measure referred to in Article 325ba(1), point (a), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (b) | the stress scenario risk measure referred to in Article 325bk of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the stress scenario risk measure referred to in Article 325bk of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

3.   When calculating hypothetical changes in a portfolio’s value, institutions shall include in that value all those adjustments that have been considered in the end-of-day valuation process referred to in paragraph 1 and that are market risk related, that are calculated on a daily basis and that are included in the institution’s risk-measurement model, with the exception of all of the following adjustments:

| (a) | credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

credit valuation adjustments reflecting the current market value of the credit risk of counterparties to the institution;

| (b) | adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

adjustments attributed to the institution’s own credit risk that have been excluded from own funds in accordance with Article 33(1), point (b) or (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

| (c) | additional valuation adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

additional valuation adjustments deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in accordance with Article 34 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

4.   Institutions shall calculate the changes in the value of the adjustments referred to in paragraph 3 on the basis of either of the following:

| (a) | all those positions that are assigned to trading desks for which institutions calculate the own funds requirements for market risk in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(a)

all those positions that are assigned to trading desks for which institutions calculate the own funds requirements for market risk in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

| (b) | all positions subject to own funds requirements for market risk. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

all positions subject to own funds requirements for market risk.

Article 5

Documentation requirements

Institutions shall have policies and procedures in place setting out how they calculate the actual and hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value or in a portfolio’s value in accordance with Articles 1 to 4 of this Regulation. Those policies and procedures shall contain all of the following elements:

| (a) | when describing how the actual changes in value of the portfolio concerned are calculated, an outline of the differences between the changes in the end-of-day portfolio values produced by the end-of-day valuation process and the actual changes in the value of the portfolio concerned; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

when describing how the actual changes in value of the portfolio concerned are calculated, an outline of the differences between the changes in the end-of-day portfolio values produced by the end-of-day valuation process and the actual changes in the value of the portfolio concerned;

| (b) | the fees and commissions and how the exclusion referred to in Article 325bf(4), point (b), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 is applied; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the fees and commissions and how the exclusion referred to in Article 325bf(4), point (b), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 is applied;

| (c) | a list of all adjustments, specifying for each adjustment all of the following:






  (i) | a description and purpose of the adjustment; |
| --- | --- | --- |

(c)

a list of all adjustments, specifying for each adjustment all of the following:

(i)

a description and purpose of the adjustment;

| (ii) | the methodology and process used for the calculation of the adjustment; |
| --- | --- |

(ii)

the methodology and process used for the calculation of the adjustment;

| (iii) | the frequency of the calculation of the adjustment and, where the frequency is less than daily, the reasoning for such frequency; |
| --- | --- |

(iii)

the frequency of the calculation of the adjustment and, where the frequency is less than daily, the reasoning for such frequency;

| (iv) | whether the adjustment is sensitive to market risk; |
| --- | --- |

(iv)

whether the adjustment is sensitive to market risk;

| (v) | the sets of positions across which the adjustment is calculated and the reasons for performing the calculation across such sets; |
| --- | --- |

(v)

the sets of positions across which the adjustment is calculated and the reasons for performing the calculation across such sets;

| (vi) | whether and how the risk stemming from changes in the adjustment is actively hedged and which trading desk or desks are responsible for such hedging; |
| --- | --- |

(vi)

whether and how the risk stemming from changes in the adjustment is actively hedged and which trading desk or desks are responsible for such hedging;

| (vii) | whether and how the adjustment is taken into account in the actual changes in the value of the portfolio concerned for the purposes of the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(6) of that Regulation; |
| --- | --- |

(vii)

whether and how the adjustment is taken into account in the actual changes in the value of the portfolio concerned for the purposes of the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and the back-testing referred to in Article 325bf(6) of that Regulation;

| (viii) | whether and how the adjustment is taken into account in the hypothetical changes in the value of the portfolio concerned for the purposes of Articles 325bf and 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, and an outline of how the change in the adjustment is calculated if unchanged positions in the portfolio are assumed. |
| --- | --- |

(viii)

whether and how the adjustment is taken into account in the hypothetical changes in the value of the portfolio concerned for the purposes of Articles 325bf and 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, and an outline of how the change in the adjustment is calculated if unchanged positions in the portfolio are assumed.

CHAPTER 2

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ATTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT

Section 1

Criteria necessary to ensure that the theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the value of a trading desk portfolio are sufficiently close and consequences for trading desks that do not meet that condition

Article 6

General requirements

1.   For the purposes of Article 325bg(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate, for a given trading desk’s portfolio, the Spearman correlation coefficient laid down in Article 7 of this Regulation, and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric laid down in Article 8 of this Regulation and, based on the results of those calculations, apply the criteria referred to in Article 9 of this Regulation. Where, according to those criteria, the theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the value of a trading desk portfolio are not sufficiently close, institutions shall be subject to the consequence set out in Article 10 of this Regulation.

2.   For the purposes of paragraph 1, institutions may align the point in time (snapshot time) for which they calculate the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value with the snapshot time for which they calculate the hypothetical changes in that value.

Article 7

Calculation of the Spearman correlation coefficient

1.   Institutions shall calculate the Spearman correlation coefficient referred to in Article 6(1) of this Regulation by performing the following steps in the following order:

| (a) | they shall determine the time series of observations of the hypothetical and theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value for the most recent 250 business days; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

they shall determine the time series of observations of the hypothetical and theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value for the most recent 250 business days;

| (b) | from the time series of the hypothetical and theoretical changes referred to in point (a), institutions shall produce the corresponding time series of ranks in accordance with paragraph 2, treating the time series of the hypothetical and theoretical changes as the originating time series; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

from the time series of the hypothetical and theoretical changes referred to in point (a), institutions shall produce the corresponding time series of ranks in accordance with paragraph 2, treating the time series of the hypothetical and theoretical changes as the originating time series;

| (c) | they shall calculate the Spearman correlation coefficient in accordance with the following formula:





  Where:








  R

  HPL | = | the time series of ranks produced from the time series of hypothetical changes referred to in point (b); |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R

  RTPL | = | the time series of ranks produced from the time series of theoretical changes referred to in point (b); |
| | = | the standard deviation of the time series of ranks RHPL
  calculated in accordance with paragraph 3, point (a); |
| | = | the standard deviation of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  calculated in accordance with paragraph 3, point (b); |
| cov (RHPL
  , RRTPL
  ) | = | the covariance calculated in accordance with paragraph 3, point (c), between the times series of ranks RHPL
  and RRTPL
  . |

(c)

they shall calculate the Spearman correlation coefficient in accordance with the following formula:

Formula

Where:

R

  HPL

=

the time series of ranks produced from the time series of hypothetical changes referred to in point (b);

R

  RTPL

=

the time series of ranks produced from the time series of theoretical changes referred to in point (b);

Formula

=

the standard deviation of the time series of ranks RHPL
  calculated in accordance with paragraph 3, point (a);

Formula

=

the standard deviation of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  calculated in accordance with paragraph 3, point (b);

cov (RHPL
  , RRTPL
  )

=

the covariance calculated in accordance with paragraph 3, point (c), between the times series of ranks RHPL
  and RRTPL
  .

2.   Institutions shall produce the time series of ranks referred to in paragraph 1, point (b), from an originating time series by performing the following steps in the following order:

| (a) | for each observation within the originating time series, institutions shall count the number of observations with a lower value than that observation within that time series; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

for each observation within the originating time series, institutions shall count the number of observations with a lower value than that observation within that time series;

| (b) | institutions shall label each observation with the number resulting from the calculation set out in point (a) increased by one; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

institutions shall label each observation with the number resulting from the calculation set out in point (a) increased by one;

| (c) | where, as a result of the labelling in accordance with point (b), two or more observations are labelled with the same number, institutions shall in addition increase the numbers of those labels with the following fraction:





  where N equals the quantity of the labels with the same number; |
| --- | --- |

(c)

where, as a result of the labelling in accordance with point (b), two or more observations are labelled with the same number, institutions shall in addition increase the numbers of those labels with the following fraction:

Formula

where N equals the quantity of the labels with the same number;

| (d) | institutions shall consider as time series of ranks, the time series of the labels obtained in accordance with points (b) and (c). |
| --- | --- |

(d)

institutions shall consider as time series of ranks, the time series of the labels obtained in accordance with points (b) and (c).

3.   Institutions shall calculate the standard deviation of the time series of ranks RHPL
  in accordance with the formula laid down in point (a), the standard deviation of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  in accordance with the formula laid down in point (b), and the covariance between those time series in accordance with the formula laid down in point (c) as follows:

| (a) | ; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Formula

| (b) | ; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

Formula

| (c) | ;Where:







  i | = | the index that denotes the observation in the time series of ranks; |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | = | the ‘i-th’ observation of the time series of ranks R

  HPL
  ; |
| | = | the mean of the time series of ranks RHPL
  ; |
| | = | the ‘i-th’ observation of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  ; |
| | = | the mean of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  . |

(c)

Formula

Where:

i

=

the index that denotes the observation in the time series of ranks;

Formula

=

the ‘i-th’ observation of the time series of ranks R

  HPL
  ;

Formula

=

the mean of the time series of ranks RHPL
  ;

Formula

=

the ‘i-th’ observation of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  ;

Formula

=

the mean of the time series of ranks RRTPL
  .

Article 8

Calculation of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric

1.   Institutions shall calculate the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric referred to in Article 6(1) of this Regulation by performing the following steps in the following order:

| (a) | they shall determine the time series of the most recent 250 business days of observations of the hypothetical and theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

they shall determine the time series of the most recent 250 business days of observations of the hypothetical and theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value;

| (b) | they shall calculate the empirical cumulative distribution function of the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value from the time series of the hypothetical changes referred to in point (a); |
| --- | --- |

(b)

they shall calculate the empirical cumulative distribution function of the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value from the time series of the hypothetical changes referred to in point (a);

| (c) | they shall calculate the empirical cumulative distribution function of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value from the time series of the theoretical changes referred to in point (a); |
| --- | --- |

(c)

they shall calculate the empirical cumulative distribution function of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value from the time series of the theoretical changes referred to in point (a);

| (d) | they shall obtain the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric by calculating the maximum difference between the two empirical cumulative distributions calculated in accordance with points (b) and (c) at any possible value of profit and loss. |
| --- | --- |

(d)

they shall obtain the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric by calculating the maximum difference between the two empirical cumulative distributions calculated in accordance with points (b) and (c) at any possible value of profit and loss.

2.   For the purposes of paragraph 1, the empirical distribution function obtained from a time series shall be understood as the function that, given any number as input, results in the ratio of the number of observations within the time series with lower or equal value than the input number to the total number of observations within the time series.

Article 9

Specification of criteria necessary to ensure that the theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the value of a trading desk portfolio are sufficiently close

1.   For the purposes of Article 325bg(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall classify each of the trading desks as a green, orange, yellow or red zone desk in accordance with paragraphs 2 to 5.

Where a trading desk is classified as a green zone desk, theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the value of that trading desk’s portfolio shall be considered sufficiently close.

Where a trading desk is classified as an orange, yellow or red zone desk, theoretical changes and the hypothetical changes in the value of that trading desk’s portfolio shall not be considered sufficiently close.

2.   A trading desk shall be classified as a ‘green zone desk’ where all of the following conditions are met:

| (a) | the Spearman correlation coefficient for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation, is greater than 0,8; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the Spearman correlation coefficient for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation, is greater than 0,8;

| (b) | the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 8 of this Regulation, is lower than 0,09. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 8 of this Regulation, is lower than 0,09.

3.   A trading desk shall be classified as a ‘red zone desk’ where either of the following conditions is met:

| (a) | the Spearman correlation coefficient for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation, is lower than 0,7; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the Spearman correlation coefficient for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation, is lower than 0,7;

| (b) | the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 8 of this Regulation, is greater than 0,12. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test metric for the trading desk, calculated in accordance with Article 8 of this Regulation, is greater than 0,12.

4.   A trading desk shall be classified as an ‘orange zone’ desk where all of the following conditions are met:

| (a) | the trading desk is not classified as either a green or a red zone desk; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the trading desk is not classified as either a green or a red zone desk;

| (b) | the own funds requirements for all the positions assigned to that trading desk were calculated in the previous quarter based on the alternative standardised approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the own funds requirements for all the positions assigned to that trading desk were calculated in the previous quarter based on the alternative standardised approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

5.   A trading desk which is not classified as a green, orange or red zone desk, shall be classified as a ‘yellow zone desk’.

Article 10

Consequences for trading desks that are classified as yellow, orange or red zone desks

1.   Institutions calculating the own funds requirements in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for positions assigned to trading desks that have been classified as red, orange or yellow zone desks in accordance with Article 9 of this Regulation shall calculate, in relation to those positions, a capital surcharge in accordance with the following formula:

Formula

Where:

| k | = | as specified in paragraph 2; |
| --- | --- | --- |
| SAima | = | the own funds requirements for market risks calculated in accordance with the alternative standardised approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the portfolio of all positions assigned to trading desks for which the institution calculates the own funds requirements for market risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| IMAima | = | the own funds requirements for market risks calculated in accordance the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the portfolio of all positions assigned to trading desks for which the institution calculates the own funds requirements in accordance with Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |

k

=

as specified in paragraph 2;

SAima

=

the own funds requirements for market risks calculated in accordance with the alternative standardised approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the portfolio of all positions assigned to trading desks for which the institution calculates the own funds requirements for market risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

IMAima

=

the own funds requirements for market risks calculated in accordance the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the portfolio of all positions assigned to trading desks for which the institution calculates the own funds requirements in accordance with Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

2.   For the purposes of paragraph 1, the coefficient k shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:

Formula

Where:

| SA

  i | = | the own funds requirements for market risks calculated in accordance with the alternative standardised approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for all the positions attributed to trading desk ‘I’; |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | = | the indices of all trading desks that have been classified as red, orange or yellow zone desks in accordance with Article 9 of this Regulation among those for which the own funds requirements for market risks are calculated in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| | = | the indices of all trading desks for which the own funds requirements for market risks are calculated in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |

SA

  i

=

the own funds requirements for market risks calculated in accordance with the alternative standardised approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for all the positions attributed to trading desk ‘I’;

Formula

=

the indices of all trading desks that have been classified as red, orange or yellow zone desks in accordance with Article 9 of this Regulation among those for which the own funds requirements for market risks are calculated in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

Formula

=

the indices of all trading desks for which the own funds requirements for market risks are calculated in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

3.   Institutions calculating the own funds requirements for market risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for positions assigned to trading desks that have been classified as red or orange zone desks in accordance with Article 9 of this Regulation shall inform the competent authority thereof when reporting the results of the profit and loss attribution requirement in accordance with Article 325az(2), point (d), of Regulation (EU) No 2013/575.

Article 11

Frequency of the assessment of compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement

Institutions shall assess compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement on a quarterly basis for all trading desks for which those institutions have the permission referred to in Article 325az(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 to calculate the own funds requirements using internal models.

Section 2

Technical elements to be included in the theoretical and hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value for the purposes of the profit and loss attribution requirement

Article 12

Technical elements to be included in the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value

1.   For the purposes of Article 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate the theoretical changes in a trading desk portfolio value based on a comparison between the portfolio’s end-of-day value and, assuming unchanged positions in the trading desk portfolio, the value of that portfolio at the end of the subsequent day.

2.   Institutions shall calculate the theoretical changes in a trading desk portfolio by using the same techniques, including the same pricing methods, model parametrisations and market data as those used in the risk measurement model.

3.   Theoretical changes in a trading desk portfolio value shall only include the changes in the value of all risk factors included in the risk-measurement model to which institutions apply the scenarios of future shocks.

Article 13

Technical elements to be included in the hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value for the profit and loss attribution requirement

For the purposes of Article 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions shall calculate hypothetical changes in a trading desk portfolio’s value in accordance with Article 3 of this Regulation.

Article 14

Alignment of data for the profit and loss attribution requirements

1.   For the purposes of Article 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions may replace the value of input data for a given risk factor used in the calculation of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value with the value of the input data of the same nature for the same risk factor used in the calculation of the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value, provided either of the following conditions is met:

| (a) | differences in the input data are due to the fact that the data are sourced from different data providers; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

differences in the input data are due to the fact that the data are sourced from different data providers;

| (b) | differences in the input data are due to the fact that the input data are extracted from the market data source at different times during the same business day. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

differences in the input data are due to the fact that the input data are extracted from the market data source at different times during the same business day.

2.   For the purposes of Article 325bg of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, institutions may replace the value of a risk factor used in the calculation of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value with the value of the same risk factor used in the calculation of the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value where all of the following conditions are met:

| (a) | the risk factor used in the calculation of the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value does not directly correspond to the input data; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

the risk factor used in the calculation of the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value does not directly correspond to the input data;

| (b) | the risk factor has been derived from the input data using techniques of the valuation systems used for the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value; |
| --- | --- |

(b)

the risk factor has been derived from the input data using techniques of the valuation systems used for the hypothetical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value;

| (c) | none of the techniques of the valuation systems referred to in point (b) have been rebuilt in the valuation systems used in the risk measurement model in order to derive the value of the risk factor which is used in the calculation of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value. |
| --- | --- |

(c)

none of the techniques of the valuation systems referred to in point (b) have been rebuilt in the valuation systems used in the risk measurement model in order to derive the value of the risk factor which is used in the calculation of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value.

Article 15

Documentation requirements

1.   Institutions shall have in place policies and procedures setting out how they calculate the theoretical changes in accordance with Articles 12 and 14 of this Regulation, which shall contain an explanation of how the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value are calculated for modellable and non-modellable risk factors.

2.   When designing the procedures for aligning the data as referred to in Article 14 of this Regulation, institutions shall apply both of the following:

| (a) | they shall compare the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value without the alignments referred to in Article 14 of this Regulation with the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value with the alignments referred to in Article 14 of this Regulation, and they shall document that comparison; |
| --- | --- |

(a)

they shall compare the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value without the alignments referred to in Article 14 of this Regulation with the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio’s value with the alignments referred to in Article 14 of this Regulation, and they shall document that comparison;

| (b) | they shall assess the effect of the alignments on the metrics of the tests used for assessing compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement referred to in Articles 7 and 8 of this Regulation and document that assessment. |
| --- | --- |

(b)

they shall assess the effect of the alignments on the metrics of the tests used for assessing compliance with the profit and loss attribution requirement referred to in Articles 7 and 8 of this Regulation and document that assessment.

3.   Institutions shall document any adjustments, performed in accordance with Article 14 of this Regulation, to the input data for the risk factors within the calculation of the theoretical changes in the trading desk portfolio, as well as the rationale for such adjustments.

Section 3

Own funds requirements calculated in accordance with the alternative internal model approach

Article 16

Calculation of the own funds requirements for market risk under the alternative internal model approach for institutions having trading desks

Institutions calculating the own funds requirements for market risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the positions assigned to some of their trading desks shall calculate the own funds requirements for all their trading book positions and all their non-trading book positions generating foreign exchange or commodity risks as the sum of the results of the formulas set out in points (a) and (b) as follows:

| (a) | |
| --- | --- |

(a)

Formula

| (b) | Where:








  IMAima | = | IMAima
  as specified in Article 10 of this Regulation; |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| SAima | = | SAima
  as specified in Article 10 of this Regulation; |
| Capital surcharge | = | the capital surcharge calculated in accordance with Article 10 of this Regulation; |
| C

  U | = | the own funds requirements calculated in accordance with Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the portfolio of positions not assigned to trading desks for which institutions calculate the own funds requirements for market risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b, of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; |
| SAall desks | = | the own funds requirements for market risks of all trading book positions and all non-trading book positions generating foreign exchange or commodity risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. |

(b)

Formula

Where:

IMAima

IMAima

=

IMAima
  as specified in Article 10 of this Regulation;

IMAima

SAima

SAima

=

SAima
  as specified in Article 10 of this Regulation;

SAima

Capital surcharge

Capital surcharge

=

the capital surcharge calculated in accordance with Article 10 of this Regulation;

C

  U

C

U

=

the own funds requirements calculated in accordance with Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the portfolio of positions not assigned to trading desks for which institutions calculate the own funds requirements for market risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1b, of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013;

SAall desks

SAall desks

=

the own funds requirements for market risks of all trading book positions and all non-trading book positions generating foreign exchange or commodity risks in accordance with the alternative internal model approach set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 1a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.

Article 17

Entry into force

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 14 June 2022.

For the Commission

The President

Ursula VON DER LEYEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1.

1

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/78/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 12).

2

---