Deutsche Bank

Annual Report 2017

Internally developed Market Risk Models

Value-at-Risk (VaR)

VaR is a quantitative measure of the potential loss (in value) of Fair Value positions due to market movements that will not be exceeded in a defined period of time and with a defined confidence level.

Our value-at-risk for the trading businesses is based on our own internal model. In October 1998, the German Banking Supervisory Authority (now the BaFin) approved our internal model for calculating the regulatory market risk capital for our general and specific market risks. Since then the model has been continually refined and approval has been maintained.

We calculate VaR using a 99 % confidence level and a one day holding period. This means we estimate there is a 1 in 100 chance that a mark-to-market loss from our trading positions will be at least as large as the reported VaR. For regulatory purposes, which include the calculation of our risk-weighted assets, the holding period is ten days.

We use one year of historical market data as input to calculate VaR. The calculation employs a Monte Carlo Simulation technique, and we assume that changes in risk factors follow a well-defined distribution, e.g. normal or non-normal (t, skew-t, Skew-Normal). To determine our aggregated VaR, we use observed correlations between the risk factors during this one year period.

Our VaR model is designed to take into account a comprehensive set of risk factors across all asset classes. Key risk factors are swap/government curves, index and issuer-specific credit curves, funding spreads, single equity and index prices, foreign exchange rates, commodity prices as well as their implied volatilities. To help ensure completeness in the risk coverage, second order risk factors, e.g. CDS index vs. constituent basis, money market basis, implied dividends, option-adjusted spreads and precious metals lease rates are considered in the VaR calculation.

For each business unit a separate VaR is calculated for each risk type, e.g. interest rate risk, credit spread risk, equity risk, foreign exchange risk and commodity risk. For each risk type this is achieved by deriving the sensitivities to the relevant risk type and then simulating changes in the associated risk drivers. “Diversification effect” reflects the fact that the total VaR on a given day will be lower than the sum of the VaR relating to the individual risk types. Simply adding the VaR figures of the individual risk types to arrive at an aggregate VaR would imply the assumption that the losses in all risk types occur simultaneously.

The model incorporates both linear and, especially for derivatives, nonlinear effects through a combination of sensitivity-based and revaluation approaches.

The VaR measure enables us to apply a consistent measure across all of our fair value businesses and products. It allows a comparison of risk in different businesses, and also provides a means of aggregating and netting positions within a portfolio to reflect correlations and offsets between different asset classes. Furthermore, it facilitates comparisons of our market risk both over time and against our daily trading results.

When using VaR estimates a number of considerations should be taken into account. These include:

  • The use of historical market data may not be a good indicator of potential future events, particularly those that are extreme in nature. This “backward-looking” limitation can cause VaR to understate future potential losses (as in 2008), but can also cause it to be overstated.
  • Assumptions concerning the distribution of changes in risk factors, and the correlation between different risk factors, may not hold true, particularly during market events that are extreme in nature. The one day holding period does not fully capture the market risk arising during periods of illiquidity, when positions cannot be closed out or hedged within one day.
  • VaR does not indicate the potential loss beyond the 99th quantile.
  • Intra-day risk is not reflected in the end of day VaR calculation.
  • There may be risks in the trading or banking book that are partially or not captured by the VaR model.

We are committed to the ongoing development of our internal risk models, and we allocate substantial resources to reviewing, validating and improving them. Additionally, we have further developed and improved our process of systematically capturing and evaluating risks currently not captured in our value-at-risk model. An assessment is made to determine the level of materiality of these risks and material risks are prioritized for inclusion in our internal model. Risks not in value-at-risk are monitored and assessed on a regular basis through our Risk Not In VaR (RNIV) framework.

Stressed Value-at-Risk

Stressed Value-at-Risk calculates a stressed value-at-risk measure based on a one year period of significant market stress. We calculate a stressed value-at-risk measure using a 99 % confidence level. The holding period is one day for internal purposes and ten days for regulatory purposes. Our stressed value-at-risk calculation utilizes the same systems, trade information and processes as those used for the calculation of value-at-risk. The only difference is that historical market data and observed correlations from a period of significant financial stress (i.e., characterized by high volatilities) is used as an input for the Monte Carlo Simulation.

The time window selection process for the stressed value-at-risk calculation is based on the identification of a time window characterized by high levels of volatility in the top value-at-risk contributors. The identified window is then further validated by comparing the SVaR results to neighboring windows using the complete Group portfolio.

Incremental Risk Charge

Incremental Risk Charge captures default and credit rating migration risks for credit-sensitive positions in the trading book. It applies to credit products over a one-year capital horizon at a 99.9 % confidence level, employing a constant position approach. We use a Monte Carlo Simulation for calculating incremental risk charge as the 99.9 % quantile of the portfolio loss distribution and for allocating contributory incremental risk charge to individual positions.

The model captures the default and migration risk in an accurate and consistent quantitative approach for all portfolios. Important parameters for the incremental risk charge calculation are exposures, recovery rates, maturity ratings with corresponding default and migration probabilities and parameters specifying issuer correlations.

Comprehensive Risk Measure

Comprehensive Risk Measure captures incremental risk for the corporate correlation trading portfolio calculated using an internal model subject to qualitative minimum requirements as well as stress testing requirements. The comprehensive risk measure for the correlation trading portfolio is based on our own internal model.

We calculate the comprehensive risk measure based on a Monte Carlo Simulation technique to a 99.9 % confidence level and a capital horizon of one year. Our model is applied to the eligible corporate correlation trading positions where typical products include collateralized debt obligations, nth-to-default credit default swaps, and commonly traded index- and single-name credit default swaps used to risk manage these corporate correlation products.

Trades subject to the comprehensive risk measure have to meet minimum liquidity standards to be eligible. The model incorporates concentrations of the portfolio and nonlinear effects via a full revaluation approach.

For regulatory reporting purposes, the comprehensive risk measure represents the higher of the internal model spot value at the reporting dates, their preceding 12-week average calculation, and the floor, where the floor is equal to 8 % of the equivalent capital charge under the standardized approach securitization framework. Since the first quarter of 2016, the CRM RWA calculations include two regulatory-prescribed add-ons which cater for (a) stressing the implied correlation within nth-to-default baskets and (b) any stress test loss in excess of the internal model spot value.