A financial institution’s
1 relationship with a correspondent
2 may result in credit
(asset) and funding (liability) concentrations. On the asset side,
a credit concentration represents a significant volume of credit exposure
that a financial institution has advanced or committed to a correspondent.
On the liability side, a funding concentration exists when an institution
depends on one or a few correspondents for a disproportionate share
of its total funding.
The agencies
3 realize some concentrations meet certain business needs or
purposes, such as a concentration arising from the need to maintain
large “due from” balances to facilitate account clearing
activities. However, correspondent concentrations represent a lack
of diversification, which adds a dimension of risk that management
should consider when formulating strategic plans and internal risk
limits.
The agencies have generally considered credit exposures
greater than 25 percent of total capital
4 as concentrations. While the agencies have
not established a liability concentration threshold, the agencies
have seen instances where funding exposures as low as 5 percent of
an institution’s total liabilities have posed an elevated liquidity
risk to the recipient institution.
These levels of credit and funding exposures are not firm
limits, but indicate an institution has concentration risk with a
correspondent. Such relationships warrant robust risk management practices,
particularly when aggregated with other similarly sized funding concentrations,
in addition to meeting the minimum regulatory requirements specified
in applicable regulations. Financial institutions should identify,
monitor, and manage both asset and liability correspondent concentrations
and implement procedures to perform appropriate due diligence on all
credit exposures to and funding transactions with correspondents,
as part of their overall risk management policies and procedures.
This guidance does not supplant or amend applicable regulations
such as the Board’s
Limitations on Interbank Liabilities (Regulation F).
5 This guidance clarifies that
financial institutions should consider taking actions beyond the minimum
requirements established in Regulation F to identify, monitor, and
manage correspondent concentration risks, especially when there are
rapid changes in market condi
tions or in a correspondent’s
financial condition, in order to maintain risk management practices
consistent with safe and sound operations.
Identifying Correspondent Concentrations Institutions should implement procedures for identifying
correspondent concentrations. For prudent risk management purposes,
these procedures should encompass the totality of the institutions’
aggregate credit and funding concentrations to each correspondent
on a standalone basis, as well as taking into account exposures to
each correspondent organization as a whole.
6 In addition, the institution should
be aware of exposures of its affiliates to the correspondent and its
affiliates.
Credit Concentrations Credit concentrations can arise from
a variety of assets and activities. For example, an institution could
have due from bank accounts, federal funds sold on a principal basis,
and direct or indirect loans to or investments in a correspondent.
In identifying credit concentrations for risk management purposes,
institutions should aggregate all exposures, including, but not limited
to:
- Due from bank accounts (demand deposit accounts (DDA)
and certificates of deposit (CD)),
- Federal funds sold on a principal basis,
- The over-collateralized amount on repurchase agreements,
- The under-collateralized portion of reverse repurchase
agreements,
- Net current credit exposure on derivatives contracts,
- Unrealized gains on unsettled securities transactions,
- Direct or indirect loans to or for the benefit of
the correspondent,7 and
- Investments, such as trust preferred securities,
subordinated debt, and stock purchases, in the correspondent.
Funding Concentrations Depending on its size and characteristics,
a concentration of credit for a financial institution may be a funding
exposure for the correspondent. The primary risk of a funding concentration
is that an institution will have to replace those advances on short
notice. This risk may be more pronounced if the funds are credit sensitive,
or if the financial condition of the party advancing the funds has
deteriorated.
The percentage of liabilities or other measurements that
may constitute a concentration of funding is likely to vary depending
on the type and maturity of the funding, and the structure of the
recipient’s sources of funds. For example, a concentration in
overnight unsecured funding from one source might raise different
concentration issues and concerns than unsecured term funding, assuming
compliance with covenants and diversification with short and long-term
maturities. Similarly, concerns arising from concentrations in long-term
unsecured funding typically increase as these instruments near maturity.
Calculating Credit and Funding
Concentrations When identifying credit
and funding concentrations for risk management purposes, institutions
should calculate both gross and net exposures to the correspondent
on a standalone basis and on a correspondent organization-wide basis
as part of their prudent risk management practices. Exposures are
reduced to net positions to the extent that the transactions are secured
by the net realizable proceeds from readily marketable collateral
or are covered by valid and enforceable netting agreements. Appendix
A, Calculating Correspondent Exposures, contains examples,
which are provided for illustrative purposes only.
Monitoring Correspondent Relationships Prudent management of correspondent concentration
risks includes establishing and maintaining written policies and procedures
to prevent excessive exposure to any correspondent in relation to
the correspondent’s financial condition. For risk management
purposes, institutions’ procedures and frequency for monitoring
correspondent relationships may be more or less aggressive depending
on the nature, size, and risk of the exposure.
In monitoring correspondent relationships for
risk-management purposes, institutions should specify internal parameters
relative to what information, ratios, or trends will be reviewed for
each correspondent on an ongoing basis. In addition to a correspondent’s
capital, level of problem loans, and earnings, institutions may want
to monitor other factors, which could include, but are not limited
to:
- Deteriorating trends in capital or asset quality.
- Reaching certain target ratios established by management,
e.g., aggregate of nonaccrual and past due loans and leases as a percentage
of gross loans and leases.
- Increasing level of other real estate owned.
- Attaining internally specified levels of volatile
funding sources such as large CDs or brokered deposits.
- Experiencing a downgrade in its credit rating, if
publicly traded.
- Being placed under a public enforcement action.
For prudent risk management purposes, institutions
should implement procedures that ensure ongoing, timely reviews of
correspondent relationships. Institutions should use these reviews
to conduct comprehensive assessments that consider their internal
parameters and are commensurate with the nature, size, and risk of
their exposure. Institutions should increase the frequency of their
internal reviews when appropriate, as even well capitalized institutions
can experience rapid deterioration in their financial condition, especially
in economic downturns.
Institutions’ procedures also should establish documentation
requirements for the reviews conducted. In addition, the procedures
should specify when relationships that meet or exceed internal criteria
are to be brought to the attention of the board of directors or the
appropriate management committee.
Managing Correspondent Concentrations Institutions should establish prudent internal concentration limits,
as well as ranges or tolerances for each factor being monitored for
each correspondent. Institutions should develop plans for managing
risk when these internal limits, ranges or tolerances are met or exceeded,
either on an individual or collective basis. Contingency plans should
provide a variety of actions that can be considered relative to changes
in the correspondent’s financial condition. However, contingency
plans should not rely on temporary deposit insurance programs for
mitigating concentration risk.
Prudent risk management of correspondent concentration
risks should include procedures that provide for orderly reductions
of correspondent concentrations that exceed internal parameters over
a reasonable timeframe that is commensurate with the size, type, and
volatility of the risk in the exposure. Such actions could include,
but are not limited to:
- Reducing the volume of uncollateralized/uninsured
funds.
- Transferring excess funds to other correspondents
after conducting appropriate reviews of their financial condition.
- Requiring the correspondent to serve as agent rather
than as principal for federal funds sold.
- Establishing limits on asset and liability purchases
from and investments in correspondents.
- Specifying reasonable timeframes to meet targeted
reduction goals for different types of exposures.
Examiners will review correspondent relationships
during examinations to ascertain whether an institution’s policies
and procedures appropriately identify and monitor correspondent concentrations.
Examiners also will review the adequacy and reasonableness of institutions’
contingency plans to manage correspondent concentrations.
Performing Appropriate Due Diligence Financial institutions that maintain credit exposures
in or provide funding to other financial institutions should have
effective risk management programs for these activities. For this
purpose, credit or funding exposures may include, but are not limited
to, due from bank accounts, federal funds sold as principal, direct
or indirect loans (including participations and syndications), and
trust preferred securities, subordinated debt, and stock purchases
of the correspondent.
An institution that maintains or contemplates entering
into any credit or funding transactions with another financial institution
should have written investment, lending, and funding policies and
procedures, including appropriate limits, that govern these activities.
In addition, these procedures should ensure the institution conducts
an independent analysis of credit transactions prior to committing
to engage in the transactions. The terms for all such credit and funding
transactions should strictly be on an arm’s length basis, conform
to sound investment, lending, and funding practices, and avoid potential
conflicts of interest.
Appendix A Calculating Respondent Credit
Exposures on an Organization-Wide Basis
Calculating
Respondent Credit Exposures on an Organization-Wide Basis
Respondent Bank’s Gross Credit Exposure to a Correspondent,
its Holding Company and Affiliates |
50,000,000 |
Due from DDA with correspondent. |
1,000,000 |
Due from DDA with correspondent’s
two affiliated insured depository institutions (IDIs). |
1,000,000 |
CDs issued by correspondent
bank. |
500,000 |
CDs issued by one of correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs. |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds sold to correspondent
on a principal basis. |
2,500,000 |
Federal funds sold to correspondent’s
affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
3,750,000 |
Reverse Repurchase agreements. |
250,000 |
Net current credit exposure
on derivatives.1 |
4,500,000 |
Direct and indirect loans
to or for benefit of a correspondent, its holding company, or affiliates. |
2,500,000 |
Investments in the correspondent,
its holding company, or affiliates |
117,500,000 |
Gross Credit Exposure. |
100,000,000 |
Total Capital. |
118% |
Gross Credit
Concentration. |
Respondent Bank’s Net Credit
Exposure to a Correspondent, its Holding Company and Affiliates |
17,850,000 |
Due from DDA (less checks/cash
not available for withdrawal & federal deposit insurance (FDI)).2 |
500,000 |
Due from DDA with correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs (less FDI).2 |
750,000 |
CDs issued by correspondent
bank (less FDI). |
250,000 |
CDs issued by one of correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs (less FDI). |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds sold on
a principal basis. |
2,500,000 |
Federal funds sold to
correspondent’s affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
100,000 |
Under-collateralized amount
on reverse repurchase agreements (less the current market value of
government securities or readily marketable collateral pledged).3 |
50,000 |
Uncollateralized net current
derivative position.1 |
4,500,000 |
Direct and indirect loans
to or for benefit of a correspondent, its holding company, or affiliates. |
2,500,000 |
Investments in the correspondent,
its holding company, or affiliates. |
80,500,000 |
Net Credit Exposure. |
100,000,000 |
Total Capital. |
81% |
Net Credit
Concentration. |
Note: Respondent Bank
has $1 billion in Total Assets, 10% Total Capital, and 90% Total Liabilities
and Correspondent Bank has $1.5 billion in Total Assets, 10 % Total
Capital, and 90% Total Liabilities.
Calculating Correspondent Funding Exposures
on an Organization-Wide Basis
Calculating
Correspondent Funding Exposures on an Organization-Wide Basis
Correspondent Bank’s Gross Funding Exposure to a Respondent
Bank |
50,000,000 |
Due to DDA with respondent. |
1,000,000 |
Correspondent’s two
affiliated IDIs’ Due to DDA with respondent. |
1,000,000 |
CDs sold to respondent bank. |
500,000 |
CDs sold to respondent from
one of correspondent’s two affiliated IDIs. |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds purchased
from respondent on a principal basis. |
2,500,000 |
Federal funds sold to correspondent’s
affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
1,000,000 |
Repurchase Agreements. |
107,500,000 |
Gross Funding Exposure. |
1,350,000,000 |
Total Liabilities. |
7.96% |
Gross Funding
Concentration. |
Correspondent Bank’s Net Funding
Exposure to a Respondent, its Holding Company and Affiliates |
17,850,000 |
Due to DDA with respondent
(less checks and cash not available for withdrawal and FDI).2 |
500,000 |
Correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs’ Due to DDA with respondent (less FDI).2 |
750,000 |
CDs sold to correspondent
(less FDI). |
250,000 |
One of correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs’ CDs sold to respondent (less FDI).2 |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds purchased
from respondent on a principal basis. |
2,500,000 |
Federal funds sold to
correspondent’s affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
150,000 |
Under-collateralized amount
of repurchase agreements relative to the current market value of government
securities or readily marketable collateral pledged.3 |
73,500,000 |
Net Funding Exposure. |
1,350,000,000 |
Total Liabilities. |
5.44% |
Net Funding Concentration. |
1 There
are 5 derivative contracts with a mark-to-market fair value position
as follows: Contract 1 (100), Contract 2 +400, Contract 3 (50), Contract
4 +150, and Contract 5 (150). Collateral is 200, resulting in an uncollateralized
position of 50.
2 While temporary deposit insurance programs may
provide certain transaction accounts higher levels of federal deposit
insurance coverage, institutions should not rely on such programs
for mitigating concentration risk.
3 Government securities means
obligations of, or obligations fully guaranteed as to principal and
interest by, the U.S. government or any department, agency, bureau,
board, commission, or establishment of the United States, or any corporation
wholly owned, directly or indirectly, by the United States.
Appendix B Calculating Respondent Credit
Exposures on a Correspondent Only Basis
Calculating
Respondent Credit Exposures on a Correspondent Only Basis
RESPONDENT BANK’S GROSS CREDIT EXPOSURE TO A
CORRESPONDENT |
50,000,000 |
Due from DDA
with correspondent. |
0 |
Due from DDA
with correspondent’s two affiliated insured depository institutions
(IDIs). |
1,000,000 |
CDs issued by
correspondent bank. |
0 |
CDs issued by
one of correspondent’s two affiliated IDIs. |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds
sold to correspondent on a principal basis. |
0 |
Federal funds
sold to correspondent’s affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
3,750,000 |
Reverse Repurchase
agreements. |
250,000 |
Net current credit
exposure on derivatives.1 |
4,500,000 |
Direct and indirect
loans to or for benefit of a correspondent, its holding company, or
affiliates. |
2,500,000 |
Investments
in the correspondent, its holding company, or affiliates. |
113,500,000 |
Gross Credit
Exposure. |
100,000,000 |
Total Capital. |
114% |
Gross Credit
Concentration. |
Respondent Bank’s Net Credit
Exposure to a Correspondent |
17,850,000 |
Due from DDA
(less checks/cash not available for withdrawal and federal deposit
insurance (FDI)).2 |
0 |
Due from DDA
with correspondent’s two affiliated IDIs (less FDI).2 |
750,000 |
CDs issued
by correspondent bank (less FDI). |
0 |
CDs issued
by one of correspondent’s two affiliated IDIs (less FDI). |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds
sold on a principal basis. |
0 |
Federal funds
sold to correspondent’s affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
100,000 |
Under-collateralized
amount on reverse repurchase agreements (less the current market value
of government securities or readily marketable collateral pledged).3 |
50,000 |
Uncollateralized
net current derivative position.1 |
4,500,000 |
Direct and
indirect loans to or for benefit of a correspondent, its holding company,
or affiliates. |
2,500,000 |
Investments
in the correspondent, its holding company, or affiliates. |
77,250,000 |
Net Credit
Exposure. |
100,000,000 |
Total Capital. |
77% |
Net Credit Concentration. |
Note: Respondent Bank has $1 billion in Total
Assets, 10% Total Capital, and 90% Total Liabilities and Correspondent
Bank has $1.5 billion in Total Assets, 10% Total Capital, and 90%
Total Liabilities.
Calculating
Respondent Funding Exposures on a Correspondent
Only Basis
Calculating
Respondent Funding Exposures on a Correspondent Only Basis
Correspondent Bank’s Gross Funding Exposure to
a Respondent |
50,000,000 |
Due to DDA with
respondent. |
0 |
Correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs’ Due to DDA with respondent. |
1,000,000 |
CDs sold to respondent
bank. |
0 |
CDs sold to respondent
from one of correspondent’s two affiliated IDIs. |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds
purchased from respondent on a principal basis. |
0 |
Federal funds
sold to correspondent’s affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
1,000,000 |
Repurchase agreements. |
103,500,000 |
Gross Funding
Exposure. |
1,350,000,000 |
Total Liabilities. |
7.67% |
Gross Funding
Concentration. |
Correspondent Bank’s Net Funding
Exposure to a Respondent |
17,850,000 |
Due to DDA
with respondent (less checks and cash not available for withdrawal
and FDI).2 |
0 |
Correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs’ Due to DDA with respondent (less FDI).2 |
750,000 |
CDs sold to
correspondent (less FDI). |
0 |
One of correspondent’s
two affiliated IDIs’ CDs sold to respondent (less FDI).2 |
51,500,000 |
Federal funds
purchased from respondent on a principal basis. |
0 |
Federal funds
sold to correspondent’s affiliated IDIs on a principal basis. |
100,000 |
Under-collateralized
amount on repurchase agreements (less the current market value of
government securities or readily marketable collateral pledged).3 |
70,200,000 |
Net Funding
Exposure. |
1,350,000,000 |
Total Liabilities. |
5.20% |
Net Funding Concentration. |
1 There
are 5 derivative contracts with a mark-to-market fair value position
as follows: Contract 1 (100), Contract 2 +400, Contract 3 (50), Contract
4 +150, and Contract 5 (150). Collateral is 200, resulting in an uncollateralized
position of 50.
2 While temporary deposit insurance programs may provide
certain transaction accounts higher levels of federal deposit insurance
coverage, institutions should not rely on such programs for mitigating
concentration risk.
3 Government securities means obligations of, or obligations
fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the U.S. government
or any department, agency, bureau, board, commission, or establishment
of the United States, or any corporation wholly owned, directly or
indirectly, by the United States.
Interagency guidance of April 30, 2010 (SR-10-10).