Skip to content

FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Integrated Risk Management

A bank's board approves a risk appetite statement that sets a ceiling on the loss it is willing to bear in a stress scenario. Within a sound ERM framework, what is the most appropriate way for management to use this statement?

Management should cascade the board's risk appetite into limits and tolerances for business lines, monitor and escalate breaches, and link it to strategy and capital planning. Treating it as a PR document, regulatory minimum, or bonus tool would strip it of its role in controlling risk-taking.

  1. ATranslate it into risk limits and tolerances for business lines, monitored and escalated when breached, and linked to strategy and capital planningCorrect
  2. BTreat it as a public relations document that does not affect limit setting
  3. CSet it equal to the regulatory minimum capital requirement so that no internal judgment is needed
  4. DUse it only to evaluate performance bonuses after year end

Explanation

Risk appetite must be cascaded into limits and tolerances, with monitoring and escalation, and tied to strategy and capital planning. Equating it to regulatory minimums removes the board's judgment, and using it only for bonuses or PR ignores its control function.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Integrated Risk Management shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Integrated Risk ManagementFree diagnostic mock

More Integrated Risk Management questions