银行风险管理外文翻译文献
商业银行信贷风险管理外文文献翻译中文3000多字
商业银行信贷风险管理外文文献翻译中文3000多字Credit risk management is a XXX business。
financing ns。
payment and settlement。
and other XXX。
credit XXX risk factor for commercial banks。
XXX such as life risk and uncertainty.Effective credit risk management is essential for commercial banks to minimize the impact of credit losses。
This involves identifying and assessing potential risks。
XXX strategies。
XXX。
By doing so。
commercial banks XXX the potential for credit losses.One of the key components of credit risk management iscredit analysis。
This involves evaluating the orthiness of borrowers to determine the likelihood of default。
Credit analysis XXX's financial history。
credit score。
collateral。
XXX credit analysis。
commercial banks can make informed lending ns and minimize the risk of default.Another important aspect of credit risk management is credit XXX can also help commercial banks XXX.In n。
金融风险管理外文翻译文献
金融风险管理外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)原文：Enterprise Risk Management in InsuranceEnterprise Risk Management (hereinafter referred as “ERM”) interests a wide range of professions (e.g., actuaries, corporate financial managers, underwriters, accountants,and internal auditors), however, current ERM solutions often do not cover all risks because they are motivated by the core professional ethics and principles of these professions who design and administer them. In a typical insurance company all such professions work as a group to achieve the overriding corporate objectives.Risk can be defined as factors which prevent an organization in achieving its objectives and risks affect organizations holistically. The management of risk in isolation often misses its big picture. It is argued here that a holistic management of risk is logical and is the ultimate destination of all general management activities.Moreover, risk management should not be a separate function of the business process;rather, managing downside risk and taking the opportunities from upside risk should be thekey management goals. Consequently, ERM is believed as an approach to risk management, which provides a common understanding across the multidisciplinary groups of people of the organization. ERM should be proactive and its focus should be on the organizations future. Organizations often struggle to see and understand the full risk spectrum to which they are exposed and as a result they may fail to identify the most vulnerable areas of the business. The effective management of risk is truly an interdisciplinary exercise grounded on a holistic framework.Whatever name this new type of risk management is given (the literature refers to it by diverse names, such as Enterprise Risk Management, Strategic Risk Management, and Holistic Risk Management) the ultimate focus is management of all significant risks faced by the organization. Risk is an integral part of each and every action of the organization in the sense that an organization is a basket of contracts associated with risk (in terms of losses and opportunities). The idea of ERM is simple and logical, but implementation is difficult. This is because its involvement with a wide stakeholder community, which in turn involves groups from different disciplines with different beliefs and understandings. Indeed, ERM needs theories (which are the interest of academics) but a grand theory of ERM (which invariably involves an interdisciplinary concept) is far from having been achieved.Consequently, for practical proposes, what is needed is the development of a framework(a set of competent theories) and one of the key challenges of this thesis is to establish the key features of such a framework to promote the practice of ERM. Multidisciplinary Views of RiskThe objective of the research is to study the ERM of insurance companies. In line with this it is designed to investigate what is happening practically in the insurance industry at the current time in the name of ERM. The intention is to minimize the gap between the two communities (i.e., academics and practitioners) in order to contribute to the literature of risk management.In recent years ERM has emerged as a topic for discussion in the financial community,in particular, the banks and insurance sectors. Professional organizations have published research reports on ERM. Consulting firms conducted extensive studies and surveys on the topic to support their clients. Rating agencies included theERM concept in their rating criteria. Regulators focused more on the risk management capability of the financial organizations. Academics are slowly responding on the management of risk in a holistic framework following the initiatives of practitioners.The central idea is to bring the organization close to the market economy. Nevertheless,everybody is pushing ERM within the scope of their core professional understanding.The focus of ERM is to manage all risks in a holistic framework whatever the source and nature. There remains a strong ground of knowledge in managing risk on an isolated basis in several academic disciplines (e.g., economics, finance, psychology,sociology, etc.). But little has been done to take a holistic approach of risk beyond disciplinary silos. Moreover, the theoretical understanding of the holistic (i.e., multidisciplinary)properties of risk is still unknown. Consequently, there remains a lack of understanding in terms of a common and interdisciplinary language for ERM.Risk in FinanceIn finance, risky options involve monetary outcomes with explicit probabilities and they are evaluated in terms of their expected value and their riskiness. The traditional approach to risk in finance literature is based on a mean-variance framework of portfolio theory, i.e., selection and diversification. The idea of risk in finance is understood within the scope of systematic (non-diversifiable) risk and unsystematic (diversifiable)risk. It is recognized in finance that systematic risk is positively correlated with the rate of return. In addition, systematic risk is a non-increasing function of a firm’s growth in terms of earnings. Another established concern in finance is default risk and it is argued that the performance of the firm is linked to the firm’s default risk. A large part of finance literature deals with severa l techniques of measuring risks of firms’ investment portfolios (e.g., standard deviation, beta, VaR, etc.). In addition to the portfolio theory, Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) was discovered in finance to price risky assets on the perfect capital markets. Finally, derivative markets grew tremendously with the recognition of option pricing theory.Risk in EconomicsRisk in economics is understood within two separate (independent) categories,i.e.,endogenous (controllable) risk and background (uncontrollable) risk. It is recognized that economic decisions are made under uncertainty in the presence of multiple risks.Expected Utility Theory argues that peoples’ risk attitude on the size of risk (small,medium, large) is derived from the utility-of-wealth function, where the utilities of outcomes are weighted by their probabilities. Economists argue that people are risk averse (neutral) when the size of the risks is large (small).Prospect theory provides a descriptive analysis of choice under risk. In economics, the concept of risk-bearing preferences of agents for independent risks was described under the notion of “ standard risk aversion.” Most of the economic research on risk is originated on the study of decision making behavior on lotteries and other gambles. Risk in PsychologyWhile economics assumes an individual’s risk preference is a function of probabilistic beliefs, psychology explores how human judgment and behavior systematically forms such beliefs. Psychology talks about the risk taking behavior (risk preferences).It looks for the patterns of human reactions to the context, reference point,mental categories and associations that influence how people make decisions.The psychological approach to risk draws upon the notion of loss aversion that manife sts itself in the related notion of “regret.” According to Willett; “risk affects economic activity through the psychological influence of uncertainty.” Managers’ attitude of risk taking is often described from the psychological point of view in terms of feelings.Psychologists argue that risk, as a multidisciplinary concept, can not be reduced meaningfully by a single quantitative treatment. Consequently, managers tend to utilize an array of risk measurers to assist them in the decision making process under uncertainty. Risk perception plays a central role in the psychological research on risk, where the key concern is how people perceive risk and how it differs to the actual outcome. Nevertheless, the psychological research on risk provides fundamental knowledge of how emotions are linked to decision making.Risk in SociologyIn sociology risk is a socially constructed phenomenon (i.e., a social problem) and defined as a strategy referring to instrumental rationality. The sociologicalliterature on risk was originated from anthropology and psychology is dominated by two central concepts. First, risk and culture and second, risk society. The negative consequences of unwanted events (i.e., natural/chemical disasters, food safety) are the key focus of sociological researches on risk. From a sociological perspective entrepreneurs remain liable for the risk of the society and responsible to share it in proportion to their respective contributions. Practically, the responsibilities are imposed and actions are monitored by state regulators and supervisors.Nevertheless, identification of a socially acceptable threshold of risk is a key challenge of many sociological researches on risk.Convergence of Multidisciplinary Views of RiskDifferent disciplinary views of risk are obvious. Whereas, economics and finance study risk by examining the distribution of corporate returns, psychology and sociology interpret risk in terms of its behavioral components. Moreover, economists focus on the economic (i.e., commercial) value of investments in a risky situation.In contrast, sociologists argue on the moral value (i.e., sacrifice) on the risk related activities of the firm. In addition, sociologists’ criticism of economists’concern of risk is that although they rely on risk, time, and preferences while describing the issues related to risk taking, they often miss out their interrelationships(i.e., narrow perspective). Interestingly, there appears some convergence of economics and psychology in the literature of economic psychology. The intention is to include the traditional economic model of individuals’ formal rational action in the understanding of the way they actually think and behave (i.e., irrationality).In addition, behavioral finance is seen as a growing discipline with the origin of economics and psychology. In contrast to efficient market hypothesis behaviour finance provides descriptive models in making judgment under uncertainty.The origin of this convergence was due to the discovery of the prospect theory in the fulfillment of the shortcomings of von Neumann-Morgenstern’s utility theory for providing reasons of human (irrational) behavior under uncertainty (e.g., arbitrage).Although, the overriding enquiry of disciplines is the estimation of risk, they comparing and reducing into a common metric of many types of risks are there ultimate difficulty. The key conclusion of the above analysis suggests that there existoverlaps on the disciplinary views of risk and their interrelations are emerging with the progress of risk research. In particular, the central idea of ERM is to obscure the hidden dependencies of risk beyond disciplinary silos.Insurance Industry PracticeThe practice of ERM in the insurance industry has been drawn from the author’s PhD research completed in 2006. The initiatives of four major global European insurers(hereinafter referred as “CASES”) were studied for this purpose. Out of these four insurers one is a reinsurer and the remaining three are primary insurers. They were at various stages of designing and implementing ERM. A total of fifty-one face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with key personnel of the CASES in between the end of 2004 and the beginning of 2006. The comparative analysis (compare-and-contrast) technique was used to analyze the data and they were discussed with several industry and academic experts for the purpose of validation. Thereafter,a conceptual model of ERM was developed from the findings of the data.Findings based on the data are arranged under five dimensions. They are understanding;evaluation; structure; challenges, and performance of ERM. Understanding of ERMIt was found that the key distinction in various perceptions of ERM remains between risk measurement and risk management. Interestingly, tools and processes are found complimentary. In essence, meaning that a tool can not run without a process and vice versa. It is found that the people who work with numbers (e.g.,actuaries, finance people, etc.) are involved in the risk modeling and management(mostly concerned with the financial and core insurance risks) and tend to believe ERM is a tool. On the other hand internal auditors, company secretaries, and operational managers; whose job is related to the human, system and compliance related issues of risk are more likely to see ERM as a process.ERM: A ProcessWithin the understanding of ERM as a process, four key concepts were found. They are harmonization, standardization, integration and centralization. In fact, they are linked to the concept of top-down and bottom-up approaches of ERM.The analysis found four key concepts of ERM. They are harmonization,standardization,integration and centralization (in decreasing order of importance). It was also found that a unique understanding of ERM does not exist within the CASES, rather ERM is seen as a combination of the four concepts and they often overlap. It is revealed that an understanding of these four concepts including their linkages is essential for designing an optimal ERM system.Linkages Amongst the Four ConceptsAlthough harmonization and standardization are seen apparently similar respondents view them differently. Whereas, harmonization allows choices between alternatives,standardization provides no flexibility. Effectively, harmonization offers a range of identical alternatives, out of which one or more can be adopted depending on the given circumstances. Although standardization does not offer such flexibility,it was found as an essential technique of ERM. Whilst harmonization accepts existing divergence to bring a state of comparability, standardization does not necessarily consider existing conventions and definitions. It focuses on a common standard, (a “top-down” approach). Indeed, integration of competent policies and processes,models, and data (either for management use, compliance and reporting) are not possible for global insurers without harmonizing and standardizing them. Hence, the research establishes that a sequence (i.e., harmonization, standardization, integration,and then centralization) is to be maintained when ERM is being developed in practice (from an operational perspective). Above all, the process is found important to achieve a diversified risk culture across the organization to allocate risk management responsibilities to risk owners and risk takers.ERM: A ToolViewed as a tool, ERM encompasses procedures and techniques to model and measure the portfolio of (quantifiable) enterprise risk from insurers’ core disciplinary perspective. The objective is to measure a level of (risk adjusted) capital(i.e., economic capital) and thereafter allocation of capital. In this perspective ERM is thought as a sophisticated version of insurers’ asset-liability management.Most often, extreme and emerging risks, which may bring the organization down,are taken into consideration. Ideally, the procedure of calculating economic capital is closely linked to the market volatility. Moreover, the objective is clear, i.e., meetingthe expectation of shareholders. Consequently, there remains less scope to capture the subjectivity associated with enterprise risks.ERM: An ApproachIn contrast to process and tool, ERM is also found as an approach of managing the entire business from a strategic point of view. Since, risk is so deeply rooted in the insurance business, it is difficult to separate risk from the functions of insurance companies. It is argued that a properly designed ERM infrastructure should align risk to achieve strategic goals. Alternatively, application of an ERM approach of managing business is found central to the value creation of insurance companies.In the study, ERM is believed as an approach of changing the culture of the organization in both marketing and strategic management issues in terms of innovating and pricing products, selecting profitable markets, distributing products, targeting customers and ratings, and thus formulating appropriate corporate strategies. In this holistic approach various strategic, financial and operational concerns are seen integrated to consider all risks across the organization.It is seen that as a process, ERM takes an inductive approach to explore the pitfalls (challenges) of achieving corporate objectives for broader audience (i.e.,stakeholders) emphasizing more on moral and ethical issues. In contrast, as a tool,it takes a deductive approach to meet specific corporate objectives for selected audience(i.e., shareholders) by concentrating more on monitory (financial) outcomes.Clearly, the approaches are complimentary and have overlapping elements. 作者：M Acharyya译文：保险业对企业风险管理的实证研究企业风险管理涉及各种行业(如保险精算师、公司财政经理、保险商、会计和内部审计员)，当前企业风险管理解决方案往往不能涵盖所有的风险，因为这些方案取决于决策者和执行则的专业道德和原则。
银行财务风险的外文文献
银行财务风险的外文文献银行财务风险的外文文献：1. Bank Financial Risk Management: A Practical Guide to Managing and Mitigating Financial Risks本书是由银行财务风险管理专家写的一本实践指南，介绍了银行在管理和缓解金融风险方面的具体策略和方法。
包括了市场风险、信用风险、利率风险、流动性风险等方面的内容。
2. Managing Financial Risks: From Global to Local该书是一本汇集了全球各地知名专家的讲座，内容涵盖了银行金融风险的最新研究成果。
从宏观经济风险到信用风险等方面，对银行金融风险管理提供了全面的视角和思路。
3. Financial Risk Manager Handbook该书是由全球金融风险管理协会GARP撰写的指南手册，涵盖了金融风险管理的理论、实践和案例研究。
介绍了金融风险的识别、量化、监控和管理等重要方面。
4. Risk Management and Financial Institutions该书是一本行业标准教材，由两位金融风险管理领域的权威合著，涉及了金融风险定义、评估和管理的关键内容。
书中还包括了现代金融和银行业的最新发展和趋势等方面的内容。
5. Financial Risk: Theory, Evidence and Implications该书是一本由多位学者合著的金融风险研究专著，旨在为银行业和投资机构等金融市场从业者提供有关金融风险识别和管理的理论和实践指南。
通俗易懂的语言介绍了金融市场的基本原则，包括风险、收益、投资组合构建和风险管理等重要方面。
银行信用风险中英文对照外文翻译文献
中英文对照外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)估计技术和规模的希腊商业银行效率：信用风险、资产负债表的活动和国际业务的影响11.介绍希腊银行业经历了近几年重大的结构调整。
重要的结构性、政策和环境的变化经常强调的学者和从业人员有欧盟单一市场的建立，欧元的介绍，国际化的竞争、利率自由化、放松管制和最近的兼并和收购浪潮。
希腊的银行业也经历了相当大的改善，通信和计算技术，因为银行有扩张和现代化其分销网络，其中除了传统的分支机构和自动取款机，现在包括网上银行等替代分销渠道。
作为希腊银行（2004 年）的年度报告的重点，希腊银行亦在升级其信用风险测量与管理系统，通过引入信用评分和概率默认模型近年来采取的主要步骤。
此外，他们扩展他们的产品/服务组合，包括保险、经纪业务和资产管理等活动，同时也增加了他们的资产负债表操作和非利息收入。
最后，专注于巴尔干地区（如阿尔巴尼亚、保加利亚、前南斯拉夫马其顿共和国、罗马尼亚、塞尔维亚）的更广泛市场的全球化增加的趋势已添加到希腊银行在塞浦路斯和美国以前有限的国际活动。
在国外经营的子公司的业绩预计将有父的银行，从而对未来的决定为进一步国际化的尝试对性能的影响。
本研究的目的是要运用数据包络分析（DEA）和重新效率的希腊银行部门，同时考虑到几个以上讨论的问题进行调查。
我们因此区分我们的论文从以前的希腊银行产业重点并在几个方面，下面讨论添加的见解。
首先，我们第一次对效率的希腊银行的信用风险的影响通过检查其中包括贷款损失准备金作为附加输入Charnes et al.(1990 年)、德雷克（2001 年）、德雷克和大厅(2003 年)，和德雷克等人（2006 年）。
作为美斯特(1996) 点出"除非质量和风险控制的一个人也许会很容易误判一家银行的水平的低效；例如精打细算的银行信用评价或生产过高风险的贷款可能会被贴上标签一样高效，当相比银行花资源，以确保它们的贷款有较高的质量"(p.1026)。
互联网银行风险管理外文及翻译
互联网银行风险管理外文及翻译1. Introduction本文目的是探讨互联网银行风险管理的外文资料，并提供翻译。
以下是一些与互联网银行风险管理相关的文献，供参考。
2. 外文文献1Author: John SmithYear: 20152.1 翻译：标题：互联网银行风险管理：综述作者：约翰·史密斯年份：2015年摘要：本文全面回顾了互联网银行风险管理的实践。
涉及的风险类型包括网络安全风险、欺诈风险和运营风险。
文章讨论了在互联网银行环境中管理这些风险的不同策略和最佳实践。
3. 外文文献2Title: Risk Assessment and Mitigation Techniques for Internet Banking SystemsAuthor: Jane DoeYear: 2018Summary: This paper focuses on the assessment and mitigation of risks in internet banking systems. It presents a framework for identifying and evaluating risks specific to internet banking and suggests various techniques for mitigating these risks. The paper also discusses the importance of continuous monitoring and updating of risk management strategies.3.1 翻译：标题：互联网银行系统的风险评估与缓解技术作者：简·多伊年份：2018年摘要：本文侧重于互联网银行系统中风险的评估和缓解。
它提出了一个针对互联网银行特定风险的识别和评估框架，并提出了各种缓解这些风险的技术。
银行风险管理外文文献及翻译
“RISK MANAGEMENT IN COMMERCIAL BANKS”(A CASE STUDY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANKS) - ABSTRACT ONLY1. PREAMBLE:1.1 Risk Management:The future of banking will undoubtedly rest on risk management dynamics. Only those banks thathave efficient risk management system will survive in the market in the long run. The effective management of credit risk is a critical component of comprehensive risk management essential for long-term success of a banking institution. Credit risk is the oldest and biggest risk that bank, by virtueof its very nature of business, inherits. This has however, acquired a greater significance in the recentpast for various reasons. Foremost among them is the wind of economic liberalization that is blowing across the globe. India is no exception to this swing towards market driven economy. Competition from within and outside the country has intensified. This has resulted in multiplicity of risks both in numberand volume resulting in volatile markets. A precursor to successful management of credit risk is a clear understanding about risks involved in lending, quantifications of risks within each item of the portfolioand reaching a conclusion as to the likely composite credit risk profile of a bank.The corner stone of credit risk management is the establishment of a framework that defines corporate priorities, loan approval process, credit risk rating system, risk-adjusted pricing system, loan-review mechanism and comprehensive reporting system.1.2 Significance of the study:The fundamental business of lending has brought trouble to individual banks and entire banking system. It is, therefore, imperative that the banks are adequate systems for credit assessment of individual projects and evaluating risk associated therewith as well as the industry as a whole. Generally, Banks in India evaluate a proposal through the traditional tools of project financing, computing maximum permissible limits, assessing management capabilities and prescribing a ceilingfor an industry exposure. As banks move in to a new high powered world of financial operations and trading, with new risks, the need is felt for more sophisticated and versatile instruments for risk assessment, monitoring and controlling risk exposures. It is, therefore, time that banks managements equip themselves fully to grapple with the demands of creating tools and systems capable of assessing, monitoring and controlling risk exposures in a more scientific manner.Credit Risk, that is, default by the borrower to repay lent money, remains the most important riskto manage till date. The predominance of credit risk is even reflected in the composition of economic capital, which banks are required to keep a side for protection against various risks. According to one estimate, Credit Risk takes about 70% and 30%remaining is shared between the other two primary risks, namely Market risk (change in the market price and operational risk i.e., failure of internal controls, etc.). Quality borrowers (Tier-I borrowers) were able to access the capital market directly without going through the debt route. Hence, the credit route is now more open to lesser mortals (Tier-II borrowers).With margin levels going down, banks are unable to absorb the level of loan losses. There has been very little effort to develop a method where risks could be identified and measured. Most of the banks have developed internal rating systems for their borrowers, but there hasbeen verylittle study to compare such ratings with the final asset classification and also to fine-tune the rating system. Also risks peculiar to each industry are not identified and evaluated openly. Data collection is regular driven. Data on industry-wise, region-wise lending, industry-wise rehabilitated loan, can provide an insight into the future course to be adopted.Better and effective strategic credit risk management process is a better way to Manage portfolio credit risk. The process provides a framework to ensure consistency between strategy and implementation that reduces potential volatility in earnings and maximize shareholders wealth. Beyondand over riding the specifics of risk modeling issues, the challenge is moving towards improved creditrisk management lies in addressing banks’readiness and openness to accept change to a more transparent system, to rapidly metamorphosing markets, to more effective and efficient ways of operating and to meet market requirements and increased answerability to stake holders.There is a need for Strategic approach to Credit Risk Management (CRM) in Indian Commercial Banks, particularly in view of;(1) Higher NPAs level in comparison with global benchmark(2) RBI’ s stipulation about dividend distribution by the banks(3) Revised NPAs level and CAR norms(4) New Basel Capital Accord (Basel –II) revolutionAccording to the study conducted by ICRA Limited, the gross NPAs as a proportion of total advances for Indian Banks was 9.40 percent for financial year 2003 and 10.60 percent for financial year 20021. The value of the gross NPAs as ratio for financial year 2003 for the global benchmark banks was as low as 2.26 percent. Net NPAs as a proportion of net advances of Indian banks was 4.33 percent for financial year 2003 and 5.39 percent for financial year 2002. As against this, the value ofnet NPAs ratio for financial year 2003 for the global benchmark banks was 0.37 percent. Further, it was found that, the total advances of the banking sector to the commercial and agricultural sectors stood at Rs.8,00,000 crore. Of this, Rs.75,000 crore, or 9.40 percent of the total advances is bad and doubtful debt. The size of the NPAs portfolio in the Indian banking industry is close to Rs.1,00,000crore which is around 6 percent of India’ s GDP2.The RBI has recently announced that the banks should not pay dividends at more than 33.33 percent of their net profit. It has further provided that the banks having NPA levels less than 3 percentand having Capital Adequacy Reserve Ratio (CARR) of more than 11 percent for the last two years will only be eligible to declare dividends without the permission from RBI3. This step is for strengthening the balance sheet of all the banks in the country. The banks should provide sufficient provisions from their profits so as to bring down the net NPAs level to 3 percent of their advances.NPAs are the primary indicators of credit risk. Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR) is another measureof credit risk. CAR is supposed to act as a buffer against credit loss, which isset at 9 percent under theRBI stipulation4. With a view to moving towards International best practices and to ensure greaterdue’ norm for identification of NPAs transparency, it has been decided to adopt the ’ 90 days’‘ overfrom the year ending March 31, 2004.The New Basel Capital Accord is scheduled to be implemented by the end of 2006. All the banking supervisors may have to join the Accord. Even the domestic banks in addition to internationally active banks may have to conform to the Accord principles in the coming decades. The RBI as the regulatorof the Indian banking industry has shown keen interest in strengthening the system, and the individual banks have responded in good measure in orienting themselves towards global best practices.1.3 Credit Risk Management(CRM) dynamics:The world over, credit risk has proved to be the most critical of all risks faced by a banking institution. A study of bank failures in New England found that, of the 62 banks in existence before 1984, which failed from 1989 to 1992, in 58 cases it was observed that loans and advances were notbeing repaid in time 5 . This signifies the role of credit risk management and therefore it forms the basisof present research analysis.Researchers and risk management practitioners have constantly tried to improve on current techniques and in recent years, enormous strides have been made in the art and science of credit risk measurement and management6. Much of the progress in this field has resulted form the limitations of traditional approaches to credit risk management and with the current Bank for International (BIS) regulatory model. Even in banks which regularly fine-tune credit policies and Settlement’ streamline credit processes, it is a real challenge for credit risk managers to correctly identify pocketsof risk concentration, quantify extent of risk carried, identify opportunities for diversification and balance the risk-return trade-off in their credit portfolio.The two distinct dimensions of credit risk management can readily be identified as preventive measures and curative measures. Preventive measures include risk assessment, risk measurement andrisk pricing, early warning system to pick early signals of future defaults and better credit portfolio diversification. The curative measures, on the other hand, aim at minimizing post-sanction loan losses through such steps as securitization, derivative trading, risk sharing, legal enforcement etc. It is widely believed that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Therefore, the focus of the study is on preventive measures in tune with the norms prescribed by New Basel Capital Accord.The study also intends to throw some light on the two most significant developments impacting the fundamentals of credit risk management practices of banking industry – New Basel Capital Accord and Risk Based Supervision. Apart from highlighting the salient features of credit risk management prescriptions under New Basel Accord, attempts are made to codify the response of Indian banking professionals to various proposals under the accord. Similarly, RBI proposed Risk Based Supervision (RBS) is examined to capture its direction and implementation problems。
外文翻译---商业银行的风险管理：一个分析的过程
毕业论文外文翻译 外文来源Commercial Bank Risk Management: An Analysis of the Process 中文译文商业银行表外业务风险控制2014年 3 月 15 日部 （系） 商 学 部 专 业 金 融 学 姓 名 学 号 指导老师Commercial Bank Risk Management: An Analysis ofthe ProcessRui HeTrends and issues in Commercial Bank Risk ManagementAbstractThroughout the past year, on-site visits to financial service firms were conducted to review and evaluate their financial risk management systems. The commercial banking analysis covered a number of North American super-regionals and quasi±money-center institutions as well as several firms outside the U.S. The information obtained covered both the philosophy and practice of financial risk management. This article outlines the results of this investigation. It reports the state of risk management techniques in the industry. It reports the standard of practice and evaluates how and why it is conducted in the particular way chosen. In addition, critiques are offered where appropriate. We discuss the problems which the industry finds most difficult to address, shortcomings of the current methodology used to analyze risk, and the elements that are missing in the current procedures of risk management.1. . IntroductionThe past decade has seen dramatic losses in the banking industry. Firms that had been performing well suddenly announced large losses due to credit exposures that turned sour, interest rate positions taken, or derivative exposures that may or may not have been assumed to hedge balance sheet risk. In response to this, commercial banks have almost universally embarked upon an upgrading of their risk management and control systems.Coincidental to this activity, and in part because of our recognition of theindustry's vulnerability to financial risk, the Wharton Financial Institutions Center, with the support of the Sloan Foundation, has been involved in an analysis of financial risk management processes in the financial sector. Through the past academic year, on-site visits were conducted to review and evaluate the risk management systems and the process of risk evaluation that is in place. In the banking sector, system evaluation was conducted covering many of North America's super-regionals and quasi±money-center commercial banks, as well as a number of major investment banking firms. These results were then presented to a much wider array of banking firms for reaction and verification. The purpose of the present article is to outline the findings of this investigation. It reports the state of risk management techniques in the industry—questions asked, questions answered, and questions left unaddressed by respondents. This report can not recite a litany of the approaches used within the industry, nor can it offer an evaluation of each and every approach. Rather, it reports the standard of practice and evaluates how and why it is conducted in the particular way chosen. But, even the best practice employed within the industry is not good enough in some areas. Accordingly, critiques also will be offered where appropriate. The article concludes with a list of questions that are currently unanswered, or answered imprecisely in the current practice employed by this group of relatively sophisticated banks. Here, we discuss the problems which the industry finds most difficult to address, shortcomings of the current methodology used to analyze risk, and the elements that are missing in the current procedures of risk management and risk control.2. What type of risk is being considered?Commercial banks are in the risk business. In the process of providing financial services, they assume various kinds of financial risks. Over the last decade our understanding of the place of commercial banks within the financial sector has improved substantially. Over this time, much has been written on the role of commercial banks in the financial sector, both in the academic literature and in the financial press. These arguments will be neither reviewed nor enumerated here.Suffice it to say that market participants seek the services of these financial institutions because of their ability to provide market knowledge, transaction efficiency and funding capability. In performing these roles, they generally act as a principal in the transaction. As such, they use their own balance sheet to facilitate the transaction and to absorb the risks associated with it.To be sure, there are activities performed by banking firms which do not have direct balance sheet implications. These services include agency and advisory activities such as(1) trust and investment management;(2) private and public placements through ``best efforts'' or facilitating contracts;(3) standard underwriting through Section 20 Subsidiaries of the holding company;(4) the packaging, securitizing, distributing, and servicing of loans in the areas of consumer and real estate debt primarily.These items are absent from the traditional financial statement because the latter rely on generally accepted accounting procedures rather than a true economic balance sheet. Nonetheless, the overwhelming majority of the risks facing the banking firm are on-balance-sheet businesses. It is in this area that the discussion of risk management and of the necessary procedures for risk management and control has centered. Accordingly, it is here that our review of risk management procedures will concentrate.3. What kinds of risks are being absorbed?The risks contained in the bank's principal activities, i.e., those involving its own balance sheet and its basic business of lending and borrowing, are not all borne by the bank itself. In many instances the institution will eliminate or mitigate the financial risk associated with a transaction by proper business practices; in others, it will shift the risk to other parties through a combination of pricing and product design.The banking industry recognizes that an institution need not engage in business in amanner that unnecessarily imposes risk upon it; nor should it absorb risk that canbe efficiently transferred to other participants. Rather, it should only manage risks at the firm level that are more efficiently managed there than by the market itself or by their owners in their own portfolios. In short, it should accept only those risks that are uniquely a part of the bank's array of services. Elsewhere (Old field and Santomero, 1997) it has been argued that risks facing all financial institutions can be segmented into three separable types, from a management perspective. These are:1. risks that can be eliminated or avoided by simple business practices;2. risks that can be transferred to other participants;3. risks that must be actively managed at the firm level.In the first of these cases, the practice of risk avoidance involves actions to reduce the chances of idiosyncratic losses from standard banking activity by eliminating risks that are superˉuous to the institution's business purpose. Common risk-avoidance practices here include at least three types of actions. The standardization of process, contracts, and procedures to prevent inefficient or incorrect financial decisions is the first of these. The construction of portfolios that benefit from diversification across borrowers and that reduce the effects of any one loss experience is another. The implementation of incentive compatible contracts with the institution's management to require that employees be held accountable is the third. In each case, the goal is to rid the firm of risks that are not essential to the financial service provided, or to absorb only an optimal quantity of a particular kind of risk.There are also some risks that can be eliminated, or at least substantially reduced through the technique of risk transfer. Markets exist for many of the risks borne by the banking firm. Interest rate risk can be transferred by interest rate products such as swaps or other derivatives. Borrowing terms can be altered to effect a change in their duration.Finally, the bank can buy or sell financial claims to diversify or concentrate the risks that result from servicing its client base. To the extent that the financial risks of the assets created by the firm are understood by the market, these assets can be sold at their fair value. Unless the institution has a comparative advantage in managing the attendant risk and/or a desire for the embedded risk which they contain, there is noreason for the bank to absorb such risks, rather than transfer them.However, there are two classes of assets or activities where the risk inherent in the activity must and should be absorbed at the bank level. In these cases, good reasons exist for using firm resources to manage bank level risk. The first of these includes financial assets or activities where the nature of the embedded risk may be complex and difficult to communicate to third parties. This is the case when the bank holds complex and proprietary assets that have thin, if not nonexistent, secondary markets. Communication in such cases may be more difficult or expensive than hedging the underlying risk. Moreover, revealing information about the customer may give competitors an undue advantage. The second case includes proprietary positions that are accepted because of their risks, and their expected return. Here, risk positions that are central to the bank's business purpose are absorbed because they are the raison of the firm. Credit risk inherent in the lending activity is a clear case in point, as is market risk for the trading desk of banks active in certain markets. In all such circumstances, risk is absorbed and needs to be monitored and managed efficiently by the institution. Only then will the firm systematically achieve its financial performance goal.4. How are these risks managed?In light of the above, what are the necessary procedures that must be in place in order to carry out adequate risk management? In essence, what techniques are employed to both limit and manage the different types of risk, and how are they implemented in each area of risk control? It is to these questions that we now turn. After reviewing the procedures employed by leading firms, an approach emerges from an examination of large-scale risk management systems. The management of the banking firm relies on a sequence of steps to implement a risk management system. These can be seen as containing the following four parts:1. standards and reports,2. position limits or rules,3. investment guidelines or strategies, and4. incentive contracts and compensation.In general, these tools are established to measure exposure, define procedures to manage these exposures, limit individual positions to acceptable levels, and encourage decision makers to manage risk in a manner that is consistent with the firm's goals and objectives. To see how each of these four parts of basic risk-management techniques achieves these ends, we elaborate on each part of the process below. In section 4 we illustrate how these techniques are applied to manage each of the specific risks facing the banking community.1.Standards and reports.The first of these risk-management techniques involves two different conceptual activities, i.e., standard setting and financial reporting. They are listed together because they are the sine qua non of any risk system. Underwriting standards, risk categorizations, and standards of review are all traditional tools of risk management and control. Consistent evaluation and rating of exposures of various types are essential to an understanding of the risks in the portfolio, and the extent to which these risks must be mitigated or absorbed.The standardization of financial reporting is the next ingredient. Obviously, outside audits, regulatory reports, and rating agency evaluations are essential for investors to gauge asset quality and firm-level risk. These reports have long been standardized, for better or worse. However, the need here goes beyond public reports and audited statements to the need for management information on asset quality and risk posture. Such internal reports need similar standardization and much more frequent reporting intervals, with daily or weekly reports substituting for the quarterly GAAP periodicity.2.Position limits and rules.A second technique for internal control of active management is the use of position limits, and/or minimum standards for participation. In terms of the latter, the domain of risk taking is restricted to only those assets or counterparties that pass some prespecified quality standard. Then, even for those investments that are eligible, limits are imposed to cover exposures to counterparties, credits, and overall positionconcentrations relative to various types of risks. While such limits are costly to establish and administer, their imposition restricts the risk that can be assumed by anyone individual, and therefore by the organization as a whole. In general, each person who can commit capital will have a well-defined limit. This applies to traders, lenders ,and portfolio managers. Summary reports show limits as well as current exposure by business unit on a periodic basis. In large organizations with thousands of positions maintained, accurate and timely reporting is difficult, but even more essential.3.Investment guidelines and strategies.Investment guidelines and recommended positions for the immediate future are the third technique commonly in use. Here, strategies are outlined in terms of concentrations and commitments to particular aras of the market, the extent of desired asset-liability mismatching or exposure, and the need to hedge against systematic risk of a particular type.4.Incentives schemes.To the extent that management can enter incentive compatible contracts with line managers and make compensation related to the risks borne by these individuals, then the need for elaborate and costly controls is lessened. However, such incentive contracts require accurate position valuation and proper internal control systems.商业银行的风险管理：一个分析的过程何瑞商业银行风险管理和相关问题摘要在过去一年里,我们通过现场参观金融服务公司来进行审查和评估其金融风险管理系统。
商业银行信用卡风险管理外文文献翻译最新译文
商业银行信用卡风险管理外文文献翻译最新译文This article discusses the importance of credit risk management for commercial banks。
Credit risk is a major concern for banks as it can lead to XXX methods used by banks to manage credit risk。
including credit scoring。
credit limits。
and loanXXX to credit risk management。
The article XXX of credit risk to ensure the long-term XXXCredit risk management is a XXX to manage credit risk XXX。
it is essential for banks to adopt us methods to manage credit risk。
These methods include credit scoring。
credit limits。
and loanXXX are used to limit the amount of credit XXXXXX credit risk management。
The credit risk management department should work XXX departments。
such as lending and complianceXXX。
XXX that they are aware of the latest developments in credit risk management。
XXX of credit risk are critical for the long-term XXX that they are effective and up-to-date。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
银行风险管理外文翻译文献(文档含英文原文和中文翻译)关于巴塞尔II：新巴塞尔资本协议的影响摘要：国际监管机构在2003年完成新资本协议，银行决定在2006年底执行这个协议。
巴塞尔协议是对全球银行业改革的监管。
在本文中，我们回顾新巴塞尔资本协议内容以及一些我们所期望对欧洲银行业发生的重要影响。
正如在第一届巴塞尔协议修正案（Basel I）中，我们得出结论，新巴塞尔协议不仅对持有资本额的数量做了规定，还对银行业的战略格局进行展望。
关键词：银行，流动性，监管，风险管理新巴塞尔资本协议的新规则巴塞尔委员会虽然只是公布了三分之一，但这很可能是协商的最后新资本协议（Basel II）文件。
这项建议如获通过，将会深刻地改变银行的偿付能力的方式，监管机构监管银行风险管理实施过程和银行必须对市场参与者公布的风险信息量，经过讨论会，巴塞尔委员会预计将在2003年底发布的新资本协议的最后草案。
目前的巴塞尔资本协议（Basel I）对达到加强国际金融体系的稳定的既定目标已经有了显著成效，通过在不同国家持续应用本协议的同时，增加了资本水平，创造了一个更公平的竞争领域。
总的来说，目前的全球一级资本的平均水平从1993年的约6%升至8%，此外，巴塞尔资本协议已经应用于100多个国家，远远超过最初的预期。
尽管实现其最初目标的成效很明显，很显然，对于巴塞尔我有一些意想不到的不良后果，这是因为目前决定的最低资本要求方式相对粗略。
根据目前的做法，银行必须持有合格股东权益账面价值(一级和二级资本)的百分之八风险加权资产（RWAs）。
在识别了潜在的有限信贷风险之后，大部分资产被完全加权。
对公司债券发行人或者经济合作与发展组织的银行和政府发行的高风险贷款的完全风险加权资产或零风险加权的资产而言，目前的协议条款缺乏足够的风险灵活性，这也意味着许多银行已经偏离了具有吸引力的价格定位。
巴塞尔的另一个不良影响表现为监管机构在限制负债资产增长的同时，监管机构也在追逐更大的套利回报（例如，凭借364天的循环贷款和风险加权资产驱动的证券化计划）。
现行做法的再一个缺陷就是只考虑信贷风险和市场风险，却忽视操作风险。
这也意味着，如咨询服务，资产管理，保管及吸收存款等现行的业务路线逐渐被认为是“毫无风险的”。
图1已经简明扼要的总结了关于新巴塞尔协议设法解决与它前身相关问题的途径，如图1所示。
可以看出，新巴塞尔协议围绕三个涵盖最低资本充足率，监督审查和市场准则等核心问题。
核心1的规定是为了防范银行信贷风险在最低资本充足率（在巴塞尔协议的基础之上有了大幅度地修改和提高），市场风险（1997年巴塞尔修正案的基础，未作修改）和操作风险（新巴塞尔中的新增项目）上暴露的风险。
关于信贷风险，银行可以选择核心1中的三种途径作为参考：标准化的方法很大程度上依赖于外部评级和监管水平。
另一种方法是以内部评级（IRB）作为基础的的方法，其允许银行使用内部模型来计算资本充足率。
这两种方法在依赖于银行实际投资行为的程度上有着相对复杂的不同：简单的内部评级基本方法都众所周知，复杂的就是先进的内部评级方法，因此，不同于巴塞尔协议的做法，个别银行采取不同的最低资本充足率取决于其内部信贷风险管理能力的复杂性和各自借贷要求的风险特征，如图2中描述。
1.设定最低可接受的资本水平2.强化信用风险评定-公共评级-内部评级-减缓3.明确的操作风险应对措施4.市场风险结构,资本定义/比例保持不变1.银行必须评估应对风险偿付能力2.监督审查银行核算和资本策略3.严格控制最低资本水平超额限度4.监管机构的早期干预能够阻止资本水平的恶化1.改善上市公司资本结构的披露2.改善风险尺度及管理措施的披露3.改善风险轮廓的披露4.改善资本充足率的披露核心1最低资本充足率核心2资本充足率的监督审查核心3市场准则新巴塞尔协议条款图1 新巴塞尔资本协议的框架图2 核心1中信贷风险的三种途径以上是三种识别操作风险的可行途径。
两个常用的包括基本的和标准的方法，针对操作风险要求列举总收入(或者，特殊情况下的资产)的百分比。
也是最复杂的、最先进的衡量方法(AMA)，它推动了操作风险量化的前沿，但其资本影响尚未确定。
新巴塞尔协议的核心2要求监管机构评估银行风险管理流程的合理性和维系较高偿付能力目标水平的资本地位。
新巴塞尔协议中明确指出：期望银行能够继续持有通过核心1下计算的超过最低水平资本的部分。
他的评价是要在对该机构进行彻底审查企业范围内的风险管理能力为基础，某种程度上，这种的内部风险测量工具已经被个别银行运用到日常业务中了。
如果风险或资本管理流程被认为不令人满意，监管机构必须介入进行干预。
最后，核心3是为了培育增强个别传统市场纪律和历史不透明的银行风险和资本管理。
通过要求加强披露的深度和广度，将首次从根本上打破银行财务报告，敏感风险参数和银行风险承担强制报告的形式。
巴塞尔委员会也与国际会计标准(IAS)组织一道参与，以确保报告要求的一致性。
因此，我们希望这些新的要求，将为未来全球金融服务机构的报告设定标准。
赢家和输家建立更加灵活性的风险框架意味着资本充足率将改变贯穿业务，银行和地区等限制。
反过来，这意味着巴塞尔II资本要求的条款下将有赢家和输家。
为了确定赢家和输家，我们分析了新巴塞尔协议对组成信贷和操作风险的最低资本充足率各种因素的影响。
我们的分析完善了由巴塞尔委员会公布了2003年5月最终定量影响研究(QIS3) 的结果。
我们的分析结果和QIS3的区别关键在于，我们的目标是, 评估新巴塞尔协议的最终影响。
而QIS3反映了目前的现状，举例来说，只有相对成熟的银行有能力使用内部评级方法来评估信贷资本充足率。
我们的估计表明，在内部评级方法的基础之上，银行业总体的最低资本充足率作为一个整体将大概不会变化。
随标准化方法增加和随内部评级方法减少，符合新巴塞尔协议(和QIS3)提出维持现有总体资产水平的目标，并全面激励改进风险管理。
如图3所示，在欧洲，有效风险加权资产量随着产品类型的不同而不断变化(包含信贷和操作风险) 。
法人风险加权资产的变化严重依赖评级。
毕竟尺度是公司违约风险(PD)的一个主导因素，非零售企业的风险加权资产增长的，反之，大型企业的持有总额将削减。
最大的削减就是抵押贷款。
正常情况下，其他零售产品也是“大赢家”，尽管这其中包括使资本充足率下的个人贷款和内部评级中所需的逐渐增加的信用卡，但这两者之间存在潜在的重大差异。
目前大部分零加权的主权国家很大可能相应最大程度地增加最低所需资本。
同样的，西欧国家有效风险加权资产的不同主要基于他们在总体投资组合的分散性和风险参数方面的差异。
在风险相对较低和银行零售贷款业务高度集中的北欧地区，内部评级中的风险加权资产可能会遭受的大幅的下降。
假设对比意大利和德国目前的趋势，德国会出现更大的增幅。
图3 欧洲不同产品的风险加权资产期望值总之，资本充足率的调整作为目前业务组合的功能。
风险管理的形势和复杂性，以及内部评级中大部分银行的监管资本可能出现缩减，有些银行的这些资本则会增加。
随之而来的事实就是当银行偏向内部评级时，更大比例的银行投资组合将被限定，有可能进一步推动了信用风险转换工具的使用，如信用衍生工具、资产证券化和二级债务资本市场的交易。
采用新巴塞尔协议对改善经营业绩有着显著的影响发展至今的银行业整体实现进化只有逐渐以节约为主的股东价值管理为导向。
由于其广泛的影响，新巴塞尔协议这种应加快这一趋势。
较之于渐渐推广的“最佳做法”，巴塞尔的要求将影响欧洲所有的银行(包括占相当比例的北美银行资产)，促使“落后者”加快了速度。
另外，资本手段促进经济资本的实施和规避风险后的回报率的关键障碍往往就是缺乏一个可靠的定量的内部评级体系。
遵循新的内部评级方法，并在信贷业务的精细水平上兑现这些措施，它将提供所需的大部分参数。
此外，对操作风险而言，新资本协议为其提供了归属于非信用经济资本或市场风险的密集行为的基础（虽然目前并不完善），如资产管理、处理和资产证券化。
随着新巴塞尔协议的指标在其业务体系尚未整合风险调整措施的银行中的实施，那些已经作出这种转变，并走在队伍前列的银行的经验将是一面镜子，可以预期的重要战略措施包括：风险定价总所周知，对信贷市场而言，风险定价是无效。
虽然这部分是由于银行使用信用卡出售非信贷业务的首要损失，这也反映了许多银行无法准确地量化使其维持在足够精细的水平的信用风险。
内部评级标准评价工具将为量化风险提供一个坚实的基础，并通过渗入更有效的风险定价机制，使之走的更远。
重新制定对企业和中小企业的投资组合的信用审核内部评级标准的评价工具，也可以作为一种调整工具，在信贷审批过程中为限额设定，贷款服务和监测进程等风险资源提供最佳指南。
通过利用新评价工具的信息内容，银行可以重新设计信贷成本流程，使他们达到“更快，更好，更省”的效果。
改进操作风险巴塞尔协议提出的资本支出必将引导改进操作风险绩效，即使只存在着微妙的联系，重点在于操作风险识别、风险损失报告、风险监控和风险控制。
积极的投资组合管理实施更好的风险和收益的措施将促进积极的投资组合管理，即投资组合经理需寻求优化的贷款，以确定资产负债表中风险收益组合的配置，哪些该保值，哪些该被抛售到二级市场。
顾客价值管理和关系经理绩效使用内部评级标准的风险测量工具宜允许银行对个别客户和客户关系经理的经济附加价值进行评估，为优化客户分类和奖励客户关系经理创造价值的能力提供更好的机会。
新巴塞尔协议标准工具的潜在杠杆作用足以弥补大多数企业的平均合理花费。
最佳实务风险和资本管理是关键新巴塞尔协议代表了风险和资本管理的新纪元，并在银行战略定位中发挥着日益核心的功能，因此，这是风险和资产负债管理中的一种进步，它的潜在成功也给后巴塞尔世界释放了明确的信号。
实现最佳实务方法包括:⏹遵循新巴塞尔协议，信贷风险将维持在接近于内部评级的先进水平，否则它毫不具有重要战略意义。
⏹加快建立信贷投资组合模型和（正在进行的）经济效率的风险转移措施的论证，并已被证实。
⏹实现趋向一体化的资本管理跨越：➢优化资本总额和一级/ 二级资本市场的结合，包括监管机构、评级机构、债权人及股东关注的资本和资本成本。
➢对内部资本资源进行有效的经济配置。
➢加强风险评估和资本经营之间的组织联系。
➢建立为以价值导向的业务规划提供支持的资本预测。
⏹增加风险和资产负债结构的披露方面的透明度，同时积极主动地加强主要风险、资本指标和外部客户战略方面的沟通。
随着市场调整适应新的披露机制和监管机构发挥的日益强大的作用，金融服务的竞争环境将会相应的转移，除了对银行内部的风险和资本管理水平有明显提升作用之外，还需对银行的业务模式进行重新评估，并且需要更清楚地对股东价值的交割目标进行沟通。
现在是不得不作出战略和战术决定的时候了，以应对新巴塞尔世界的到来。