Skip to content

FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Stress Testing Banks

A bank's risk committee reviews its stress testing program. Credit, market and liquidity teams each run their own scenarios using different macroeconomic assumptions and report separately to the board. Which weakness of this approach is MOST directly addressed by an enterprise-wide stress testing framework?

Enterprise-wide stress testing addresses the failure to capture interactions and feedback effects across risk types. Separate silo tests use inconsistent macro assumptions, so the aggregate impact is misstated. A common coherent scenario applied across credit, market, liquidity and other risks lets the bank aggregate results and see compounding effects.

  1. AScenarios are too severe to be plausible
  2. BInteractions and feedback effects across risk types are not captured because assumptions are inconsistentCorrect
  3. CStress tests are performed too frequently
  4. DReverse stress tests replace the need for scenario analysis

Explanation

Silo-based testing with differing macro assumptions cannot capture how losses in one risk area amplify others, such as market losses triggering funding stress. An enterprise-wide approach applies a common, coherent scenario across all risk types and aggregates the results. Severity and frequency are not the core issue here.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Stress Testing Banks shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Stress Testing Banks questions