Skip to content

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

A bank's board wants its risk appetite statement to be usable by business lines in day-to-day decisions. Which feature would best make the statement operational rather than purely aspirational?

Cascading quantitative limits and tolerances to business units, linked to strategy and capital, makes a risk appetite statement operational. Qualitative statements cannot be monitored, a single annual figure does not guide daily decisions, and a loss history describes the past rather than setting acceptable levels of risk-taking.

  1. AA qualitative description of the bank's desire to be prudent and well regarded
  2. BQuantitative risk limits and tolerances cascaded to business units, linked to the bank's strategy and capitalCorrect
  3. CA single enterprise-wide VaR figure reviewed by the board once a year
  4. DA list of past loss events grouped by Basel event type

Explanation

An operational risk appetite statement translates board-level appetite into measurable limits and tolerances that business units can apply, tied to strategy and capital. Purely qualitative language cannot be monitored or breached. A single annual VaR figure is not cascaded to decisions, and a loss event list is historical information rather than an appetite.

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.

More Integrated Risk Management questions