Abstract
This note focuses on the elements of novelty that characterise the 2016 stress test, based on the methodological notes released by the European Banking Authority, and discusses in closer detail the following key aspects: the request for specific forecasts concerning 'conduct risk'; the greater attention towards risks originated by foreign exchange exposures; the lack of a 'pass/fail' threshold that partitions tested banks into 'safe' and 'unsafe' ones; and the change in the sample size of banks required to take the test.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Banking, Accounting and Finance
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
