Basel III Versus Solvency II: An Analysis of Regulatory Consistency Under the New Capital Standards

Daniela Laas and Caroline Franziska Siegel

Journal of Risk & Insurance, 2017, vol. 84, issue 4, 1231-1267

Abstract: This article provides a critical analysis of the consistency of the standard approaches for market and credit risks under Solvency II and the current and forthcoming Basel III standards. The comparability is assessed both theoretically via a detailed comparison of the capital standards and in a numerical analysis that contrasts the capital charges for a stylized portfolio. Our examination reveals substantial discrepancies in the design of the frameworks. These lead to vastly differing capital requirements for the same risks. Moreover, the analysis indicates higher charges for banks than insurers, especially under the proposed new Basel III standard approaches.

Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/jori.12154

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jrinsu:v:84:y:2017:i:4:p:1231-1267

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.wiley.com/bw/subs.asp?ref=0022-4367

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk & Insurance is currently edited by Joan T. Schmit

More articles in Journal of Risk & Insurance from The American Risk and Insurance Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().