Online Banking Part.II

The only entities that have managed to sustain their existence are those that are backed by a bank, maintaining an independent identity. This allowed them to diversify their services, taking advantage of operational know-how and organization of their parent and thus offer very attractive prices. Boursorama is a convincing example of this model. Since its merger with Society General, Boursorama is no longer confined to the business broker but has become a real bank.

However, if the online bank has no place as an organization independent financial, recent operations have shown that online banking is now essential to any actor with a network. New entrants in the banking landscape have understood. Insurers having embarked on the adventure of assurfinance began with an offer to acquire or develop online banking in addition to the existing branch network.

The acquisition of online banks by banks should not be seen as a way to computerize the customer relationship. Indeed, banks are seeking to boost their network by opening branches. The agency is the best way to attract customers, offering Internet users the ability to simplify the management of operations.

However some players have managed to build a profitable business model around online banking service. This model is based on tactical development articulated in two phases:

(I) a startup focused on specialized and profitable activities. For example, the tactic is to capture customer deposits and generate commissions on high value added activities (securities, life insurance ...) and for which the customer is willing to pay.

(Ii) enlargement to daily banking activities (current accounts, credit card) which are less profitable because of investments in infrastructure require significant yield little and are subject to very strong competition.

Online Banking Part.I

The acquisition of Egg by Citigroup shall deliver to the agenda the question of the model of online banks. Founded in 1998 by Prudential, Egg has always been deficient - the French branch was sold in 2004 to Auchan in the development of banking activities and never managed to achieve the objectives in terms of customers. This is the situation common to most of the independent online banks. However, their creation in the late 1990s, online banks seemed to have a promising future thanks to the Internet phenomenon. How to explain such a setback?


At the beginning, the online banks were intended to attract a large clientele (Egg counted on a portfolio of 1 million customers in 2003, five years after its creation) by proposing a new banking model: an account management possible at any time and from any Internet-connected computer, with an offer "discount". Using the Internet as the only interface between the bank and the customer had to allow significant savings, both in terms of personnel but also capital assets. Thus, online banks offer rates were very aggressive on a range of services equivalent to that of a traditional bank. However, they failed to offer prices low enough to stand out, to forget the absence of physical relationship between the customer and the banker, and manage to capture some of the customers used to a classical model.

Weakened by the explosion of the Internet bubble in 2000, online banks could not withstand the intensity of competition in the banking sector, especially as traditional banks, although behind the banks line, developed or acquired equivalent services. The interest of a "pure player" of online banking has therefore been questioned since it was possible to combine customer relationship in a network, and maximum flexibility via the Internet.

Liquidity Crisis And Stress Testing

Liquidity risk cannot be treated satisfactorily by the VAR because it ignores the risk exposure of a portfolio during the process of its liquidation. A liquidity crisis is usually an extreme event, so it requires tools Stress testing more appropriate than the VaR.

To fight against liquidity crises, the scenarios of crisis of a financial institution must include all the fragility of its balance sheet, namely the possible mismatch between investments in illiquid assets and funding sources precarious liabilities. A Stress Test relevant to a financial institution would be important to consider the consequences of a simultaneous withdrawal of its market counterparties. This is the way in which JP Morgan is committed after the near-collapse of LTCM in 1998. JP Morgan has developed the "dealer exit stress tests" to estimate the risk of sudden drying up of market liquidity due to one or more of their counterparties. This kind of stress tests and allowed to become aware of the dangers of the high concentration of certain financial markets.

One of the limitations of VaR as originally calculated was based on an assumption of "normality" of events. Or rare events are more important in magnitude than the law says normal. The work was therefore directed towards the use of distributions from "fat tails". Stress Testing procedure has the advantage of circumventing this difficulty by specifying the desired magnitude of the event, regardless of its probability of occurrence. Therefore it is considered an extension of the VaR.

Although complementary, these two methods have significant differences, however, since they are far from operating in the same period. Indeed, while the VaR is a tool for highly automated daily monitoring, Stress Testing requires the intervention of a number of players and often requires a significant delay construction and analysis. Thus, if the answer to a VaR limit is exceeded is simple (just cut positions), the response to overexposure through a liquidity stress analysis is more complex (installation program or refinancing guarantees, etc.)..
Finally, unlike the VaR with the automatic calculation can facilitate the adoption of the outcome, the results of stress testing because they are developed from subjective elements, require a real effort to communicate and explain with decision-making bodies.

Market Risk Assessment -2

Using a single number, indicate the VaR of a portfolio exposure to market risk and the likelihood of loss under the conditions proposed. The risk is also measured in monetary units, the same as those in which balances are established. Finally, among its other benefits, VaR:

* To evaluate the performance and correct any risk-based.
* Promote the information and transparency to the extent that it is a measure expressed in non-technical terms and may be subject to periodic reports.
* To determine the allocation of funds to invest and set quantitative limits for risk managers.

Three calculation methods are generally used to estimate the distribution of losses. They have in common to estimate the potential change in portfolio value from the data of the past, however, differ on the following:

* The historical method: observation of the historical behavior of the position to estimate the VaR;
* The parametric method: decomposition of the position of instruments based on different risk factors (equity indices, rates of different maturities, exchange rates ...) and then estimate the probability distribution of risk factors;
* The Monte Carlo simulation Monte Carlo market factors from an a priori probability distribution and estimate the VaR, as the historical method, from the sample generated.

Market Risk Assessment -1

Quantification of risk is a major concern of financial players because it allows them to answer questions like "How can we lose with our portfolio in normal market conditions or abnormal for a time horizon given? ". VaR (Value at Risk) and Stress Testing are the two most common methods of quantification of risk and are usually combined.

Although the VaR can be used as a baseline measurement for all types of risk and the overall level of society, its most common use for market risk.
VaR is a probabilistic measure of the loss of a portfolio point of a given composition as a result of future changes in risk factors. It is defined by the maximum probable loss at a confidence level of x% (for a time horizon of one day / one week, etc.).. Var corresponds to the loss that will not be exceeded in more than (100-x)% of cases, when a position given structure is maintained for a period [0, T].

If Vt is the value of the position t, the VaR is given by:
Pr {Vo - VT} ≤ ≥ VaR (100 - x) / 100

For example, consider a portfolio for which the VaR of € 100 million with a confidence level of 99% over a period of one week, meaning that, under normal market conditions, there is a probability of 1 % to record a loss of more than € 100 million for the week of detention (period over which the change in value of the portfolio is measured).