BCR Publishing
We are the leading provider of news, market intelligence, events and training for the global receivables finance industry.
Working with industry leading organisations, experts, governments and universities, BCR Publications delivers expertise in factoring, receivables and supply chain finance to a global audience.
BCR has long been a beacon of innovation and excellence in the realm of receivables finance, playing an instrumental role in shaping the industry’s international landscape. Through its comprehensive conferences, insightful publications, and thought leadership, BCR has facilitated crucial dialogues and connections among industry professionals, driving forward the development of receivables finance globally.
Managing treasury risk: Credit Risk (Part V)
| 23-2-2017 | Lionel Pavey |
There are lots of discussions concerning risk, but let us start by trying to define what we mean by risk. In my fifth article I will focus on credit risk. Many companies have very significant credit needs and this needs to be formally addressed with a credit analysis procedure in place. In my former articles I dealt with risk management, interest rate risk, foreign exchange risk and commodity risk. See the complete list at the end of today’s article.
Credit Risk
Credit Risk occurs when there is a risk of default from money that has been lent to a borrower, or funds that have been invested.
The risk can be caused by:
Main categories
The main categories of credit risk are:
Default risk
Counterparty risk
Sovereign risk
Legal risk
Concentration risk
Default risk:
occurs due to the default on monies owed either from lending or investment. The counterparty could be unable to repay. Sometimes they could also be unwilling to repay. The default risk is therefore on 100% of the outstanding balance, unless some form of recovery (be it full or partial) was possible.
Counterparty risk:
occurs when counterparties have to perform an action on a contractual commitment.
This can happen at both the time of settlement and also before settlement, but after entering a contract. Since the start of the financial crisis settlement risk is a major factor for banks. If at settlement a counterparty fails to meet its obligation, this can potentially lead to large losses and, eventually, to a systemic risk as you are therefore unable to meet your own obligations. A default before settlement can be alleviated by substituting a new contract though this could occur at prices far less favourable.
Sovereign risk:
entails the political, legal and regulatory exposures arising from international trade and cross border transactions. It can relate to a government failing in its obligation to repay or to new laws that prohibit free movement of funds – exchange control. Any contracts entered into with nondomestic counterparties should be analysed for the embedded sovereign risks and potential political instability.
Legal risk:
can occur if the counterparty is not legally allowed to enter into certain trades – especially derivative trades. We see in the media stories of companies that have experienced difficulties with derivatives leading to losses and court cases are started to either enforce or negate the contract. Also special purpose vehicles are formed purely to enter into certain transactions like securitisation issues. These are companies with no staff, fixed abode, or assets other than the underlying collateral of the issue.
Concentration risk:
arises from lack of diversification. Too many loans from 1 or 2 banks, too many products purchased from 1 or 2 suppliers, too much revenue generated by 1 or 2 customers. This risk is a bit of a paradox as many companies become successful through concentrating their resources in key niche areas, whilst having to diversify their underlying risk at the same time.
Measures
There are, of course, measures that can be undertaken to identify and minimize these potential losses.
The first approach is counterparty ratings. Certain criteria can be examined – credit rating agencies, examination of financial statements, good knowledge of the counterparty, political, geographical (are they situated next to a volcano?) and legal status.
Notional exposure reveals the full amount outstanding with a counterparty – all the money that could potentially be lost.
Aggregate exposure netts the exposure with a counterparty between monies to be received and monies to be paid.
Clear picture of the replacement costs – the costs involved to replace the existing transaction with a new counterparty.
Techniques of measurement
Measurement of credit risk requires quantitative techniques to measure and model the risks. An example would be Basel III that places a regulatory framework on banks to ensure adequate capital ratios. Eventually the techniques being used will trickle down to commercial companies. This should result in the creation of risk tools that are more sophisticated and improvements of the techniques used to report and measure risk.
However, as the financial crisis has clearly shown, over-reliance on sophisticated computer models appeared to lead to false comfort with the results generated by the modelling systems. This was caused by underestimating the risks in new financial products and the great assumption that is always prevalent in economic theory – people behave rationally at all times! Any model is a snapshot of the world and can only contain a few variables that are perceived as critical. All others are discarded to ensure that the model can work quickly and efficiently.
Lionel Pavey
Cash Management and Treasury Specialist
More articles of this series:
Managing treasury risk: Risk management
Managing treasury risk: Interest rate risk
Managing treasury risk: Foreign exchange risk
Managing treasury risk: Commodity Risk
What’s FinTech and how does it change the financial world?
| 22-2-2017 | Arnoud Doornbos |
FinTech is a contraction of the words financial and technology. In other words: it covers all innovative financial products and services that simplify and accelerates the way we handle money. For traditional banks FinTech is still an uncomfortable concept. Why? Because a large portion of the revolutionary financial concepts are derived from technology driven start-ups. These start-ups change the traditional ecosystem. This is enormously important in a country like the Netherlands where the majority of firms is financed by banks and personal finances of the people are predominantly held by financial institutions which find it often difficult to modernize.
The emergence of ICT in the financial sector may also have different consequences. Those FinTech companies that focus on a single product or service can erode the business model of banks. At the same time the same technology also offers opportunities for traditional players to improve their service and reduce costs. Also, traditional players have a competitive advantage over new entrants based on their knowledge of regulations and access to information from relationship banking (also called soft information).
FinTech companies have greatly changed the rules of the sector. Today we can pay via our mobile phone, quickly apply for online credit and invest online with one click. The list of innovative ideas is endless and an enrichment for everyone.
FinTech VC investments
The explosive growth of the financial technology industry continued in 2016.
Source: Pitchbook Innovate/Finance
Most money was invested in start-ups. Projections show that the amount of investment will continue to rise.
The power of this technology-driven financial services lies in the fact that it is fast, efficient, transparent and mobile. You can use these services as long as you have Internet access. Of course, this strongly contrasts with the discontent which experienced customers from traditional banks.
Looking ahead — the FinTech industry could experience even greater growth moving into the coming year. The future remains positive from an investment perspective. We may expect an uptick after relative slow growth in the second half of 2016 due to political risks such as the Brexit and the US elections which fueled great uncertainty across all emerging sectors. Along with increased attention, the industry could see a large number of fresh launches and FinTech could make its way into an even stronger growth pattern in 2017 as investors have become more certain about industry prospects.
The possibilities for FinTech in Netherlands
In the Netherlands, there is also a strong rise of FinTech companies. Companies like Paypal are rapidly gaining market share. The biggest and best-known Dutch company FinTech Adyen. This company was recently valued at more than € 2.3 billion.
The FinTech Top 100 announced in 2016 that there are eight Dutch FinTech startups are part of the leading European companies in the financial technology. The financial infrastructure and the international focus play an important role. In addition, capital and expertise is also necessary for innovation, two factors Netherlands as a European Member State meets. The Netherlands also rise in 2016 from the 5th to the 4th place in the ranking of most competitive economies in the world.
The infographic shows that, perhaps inspired by Adyen, payment providers constitute a large share of the pie. Also data startups and alternative financing (crowdfunding example) are well represented in the Netherlands.
Dutch FinTech awards 2017
FinTech startups are disrupting the financial sector. Innovative companies are eager to please millions of frustrated banking customers. Investors are fascinated by the phenomenal profits made by banks struggling with outdated technology. Today, more and more money is being invested in FinTech. The Uber of the banking sector has not yet emerged, but this is only a matter of time. On April 21 the Dutch FinTech Awards 2017 will be held in Utrecht at the Rabobank Headquarter. The panel of judges of this years event consists of seasoned investors, academics, marketeers, entrepreneurs with an extensive track record in finance and/ or technology. (http://www.fintech.nl). The author of this article is one of the judges
Future
What we see in practice is that components of banking products and services are being redeveloped by the FinTech Industry.
These FinTech solutions are smarter, faster and better.
As a result we now see that different FinTech companies will work together. The individual Fintech products often turn out to be complementary to each other.
FinTech companies now recognize that collaboration with other FinTech companies leads to high growth and a better product range.
The Uber of the banking sector
The Uber of the banking sector has not yet emerged, but this is only a matter of time.
Arnoud Doornbos
Associate Partner
Uniform Herstelkader Rentederivaten MKB
| 21-2-2017 | Simon Knappstein |
Op 19 december van vorig jaar is het definitieve herstelkader rentederivaten gepubliceerd door de Derivatencommissie. Dit is een update van de versie die al in juli van 2016 werd gepubliceerd. De update is inhoudelijk onveranderd maar bevat een aantal toelichtingen en bijlagen om de werking van het herstelkader te verduidelijken.
De opdracht om dit herstelkader op te stellen is door de Minister van Financiën in maart 2016 gegeven. Alle Nederlandse banken hebben zich aan dit herstelkader gecommitteerd.
Tegelijk met deze publicatie heeft de Derivatencommissie ook een informatieve brochure uitgegeven. Banken zullen deze gaan opnemen in hun brieven die ze naar klanten met renteswaps gaan sturen. Hierin wordt op hoofdlijnen de werking van de compensatieregeling uitgelegd.
Eerst wordt het toepassingsbereik geschetst, voor wie geldt dit herstelkader?
Dit herstelkader is van toepassing op niet-professionele partijen die niet aan deskundigheids-eisen voldoen. Dat betekent in de praktijk dat het met name gaat om MKB-ondernemingen en particulieren. Verder gelden er voorwaarden met betrekking tot de looptijd van de rentederivaten. (Een interessante ontwikkeling is dat het gerechtshof in Den Haag gisteren geoordeeld heeft dat een groot bedrijf toch recht heeft op schadevergoeding voor renteswaps die de bank heeft verkocht, als vooraf duidelijk was dat het bedrijf geen speciale kennis had over dit soort financiële instrumenten.)
Vier stappen
Vervolgens zijn er vier stappen gedefinieerd om de hoogte van de compensatie te bepalen.
In stap 1 worden gestructureerde, complexe derivaten door de banken aangepast naar een renteswap, een rentecap of een rentecollar. Het verschil in netto cashflows wordt in deze stap gecompenseerd.
In stap 2 worden alle verschillen tussen het derivaat en de onderliggende financiering aangepast. Denk hierbij aan een overhedge in omvang, een overhedge in looptijd of afwijkingen in referentierente. Ook hier worden de verschillen in netto cashflows gecompenseerd.
In stap 3 bieden de banken een coulancevergoeding aan. Deze vergoeding bedraagt maximaal 20% van de rente die per saldo onder een renteswap dan wel rentecollar aan de bank is betaald en naar verwachting nog zal worden betaald. Deze vergoeding is gemaximeerd op €100.000,-. Mijn ervaring is dat met een looptijd van 10 jaar en een hoofdsom van €2,0 mio a €2,5 mio dat maximum wel bereikt wordt.
In stap 4 vergoeden banken onverwachte verhogingen van renteopslagen op financiering(en) die door een renteswap worden afgedekt.
De banken verwachten dat zij in de loop van 2017 hun klanten kunnen informeren met concrete compensatievoorstellen. De exacte timing zal per bank verschillen. Als de bank een voorstel heeft gedaan, kan de klant beslissen of hij van het voorstel gebruik maakt. Bij acceptatie van het voorstel, verleent hij finale kwijting aan de bank.
Toezichthouder AFM gaat er op toezien dat de banken en de externe beoordelaars dit proces zorgvuldig en volledig uitvoeren.
Als u meer wilt weten over dit herstelkader kunt u mij mailen op [email protected]
Simon Knappstein
Owner of FX Prospect