The article reveals the essence of stress testing as a tool for assessing the reliability and stability of economic and technical systems. Based on a retrospective approach, the evolution of stress testing of banking risks in the world and in Ukraine is systematized. A comparative assessment of the definitions of stress testing of banking risks provided by international financial organizations and the national regulator was carried out, and their common and distinctive features were determined. It is shown that according to the level of stress testing of banking risks, it is divided into macro- and microeconomic, their comparison is made, advantages and disadvantages are determined. The main macro- and microeconomic risk factors recommended by the NBU for stress testing are systematized. The content of the banking risk stress testing system has been formalized, its elements have been identified: purpose, tasks, objects, methods, criteria for the effectiveness of stress testing scenarios, models of their formation, assumptions regarding the level of risk, components of the analysis, basic requirements for implementation, main stages. The main methods of stress testing banking risks and types of predicted losses are summarized, their content and main tools are disclosed. It is shown that the most common method of stress testing is the development of scenarios. Systematized NBU requirements for: development of internal bank documents regarding the organization and procedure of stress testing; to the functioning of the information system regarding risk management and reporting in stressful situations; responsibilities of the Chief Risk Manager in terms of communications with the bank's top management and the use of stress testing results for management decision-making. The directions for improving stress testing are substantiated: taking into account real shocks to the financial system, the speed of the spread of crises between countries, expanding the range of risks that are taken into account when building scenarios; regular and systematic implementation, constant review of methods and shock factors; ensuring proper practical use of results; adjusting strategies and plans to reduce banking risks.
Read full abstract