Basel II: Numerical instabilities to stabilize banks?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DrDu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Numerical
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the correlation formula for Basel II, specifically addressing the numerical stability of banks. The proposed formula, Corr(R)=0.12(1+\exp(-50 \mathrm{PD})), is favored over the original complex expression. N. N. Taleb emphasizes the importance of maintaining fragile financial systems rather than creating robust systems that risk becoming 'too big to fail'. This highlights a critical perspective on financial stability and risk management in banking.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Basel II regulatory framework
  • Familiarity with financial risk metrics, particularly Probability of Default (PD)
  • Knowledge of mathematical modeling in finance
  • Experience with exponential functions and their applications in risk assessment
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the proposed correlation formula on risk management strategies
  • Explore the critiques of Basel II by N. N. Taleb and other financial theorists
  • Learn about the impact of numerical stability on financial modeling
  • Investigate alternative risk assessment frameworks beyond Basel II
USEFUL FOR

Financial analysts, risk managers, and banking professionals seeking to understand the nuances of Basel II and its implications for financial stability.

DrDu
Science Advisor
Messages
6,423
Reaction score
1,004
Oops, I was to quick here. At least, there is no instability. Nevertheless I would write
##\mathrm{Corr}(R)=0.12(1+\exp(-50 \mathrm{PD}))## instead of
Correlation (R) =
0.12 × (1 – EXP (-50 × PD)) / (1 – EXP (-50)) +
0.24 × [1 - (1 - EXP(-50 × PD))/(1 - EXP(-50))]
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Retired quant polymath N. N. Taleb argues, better fragile financials than robust 'bubbles' too big to fail or allow to burst.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K