11.07.2015 Views

Annual Accounts and Report as at 30 June 2011 Draft - Mediobanca

Annual Accounts and Report as at 30 June 2011 Draft - Mediobanca

Annual Accounts and Report as at 30 June 2011 Draft - Mediobanca

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 1 - Value <strong>at</strong> risk <strong>and</strong> expected shortfall of <strong>as</strong>set structure12 mths toRisk factors 12 mths to <strong>30</strong>/6/11<strong>30</strong>/6/10(€’000) <strong>30</strong>/6 Min Max Avg. Avg.Interest r<strong>at</strong>es ................... <strong>30</strong>,619 12,244 42,726 18,926 18,644- of which: specific risk 19,861 7,695 28,278 14,335 9,348Share prices ................... 21,566 12,392 37,716 22,176 20,585Exchange r<strong>at</strong>es ................. 6,7<strong>30</strong> 909 7,427 3,366 1,999Infl<strong>at</strong>ion ....................... 280 200 979 436 1,566Vol<strong>at</strong>ility ....................... 3,987 1,218 4,794 2,528 1,490Diversific<strong>at</strong>ion effect *........... (14,217) (4,533) (21,057) (12,<strong>30</strong>6) (9,479)TOTAL ......................... 48,685 21,606 71,126 34,691 34,805Expected shortfall……………... 86,166 65,472 88,402 78,270 65,098* Due to mism<strong>at</strong>ches between risk factors.The average expected shortfall 3 w<strong>as</strong> up 20%, from €65.1m to €78.3m,chiefly due to l<strong>as</strong>t year’s result being impacted by the sharp changes in vol<strong>at</strong>ilitywhich are not accur<strong>at</strong>ely reflected in the calcul<strong>at</strong>ion model b<strong>as</strong>ed on thehistorical simul<strong>at</strong>ion method.Analysis of VaR for the trading book (cf. Table 2 below) overall reflects thetrends witnessed in the various different risk factors <strong>at</strong> the aggreg<strong>at</strong>e level. Theincre<strong>as</strong>e of around 10% in the average d<strong>at</strong>a, from €18.1m to €20.1m, compared tothe stability of the aggreg<strong>at</strong>e d<strong>at</strong>a, is merely the result of the incre<strong>as</strong>e in the stockmarket component which in turn w<strong>as</strong> caused by the arbitrage positions onequities referred to above, the overall effect of which is mitig<strong>at</strong>ed by the presenceof AFS equity positionsOf the other risk factors, there w<strong>as</strong> an incre<strong>as</strong>e in the exchange r<strong>at</strong>es <strong>and</strong>vol<strong>at</strong>ility components <strong>and</strong> a reduction in infl<strong>at</strong>ion, <strong>and</strong> although the interest r<strong>at</strong>ecurves’ contribution reflect higher specific risk (up from €6.5m to €10.7m),overall it w<strong>as</strong> down from €17m to €15.6m. The highs <strong>and</strong> lows for VaR readingswere also less pronounced: the high for the period w<strong>as</strong> just under €40m(compared with over €90m l<strong>as</strong>t year), <strong>and</strong> the low over €11m, compared with just€4.7m in 2009-10. Equally, there w<strong>as</strong> a significant incre<strong>as</strong>e in the expectedshortfall,3Average of losses recorded in 1% of the most unfavourable scenarios.384 –

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!