in force 2025-01-01 MODIFIED+296 −0§
Amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1623 32024R1623 · Regulation (EU) 2024/2987 32024R2987 · Regulation (EU) 2024/2795 32024R2795
applies from: unchanged
A new paragraph 2a has been added, requiring the scenarios used under paragraph 2 to also include ESG risk drivers, specifically physical risk and transition risk drivers stemming from climate change.
The new paragraph also states that EBA shall issue guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, on the application of paragraphs 2 and 2a.
Paragraphs 1 and 3 remain unchanged between the two versions.
Cited: Art. 177, v2 · Art. 177, v1
text before / after
02013R0575-20240709 → 02013R0575-20250101
Article 177 Stress tests used in assessment of capital adequacy 1. An institution shall have in place sound stress testing processes for use in the assessment of its capital adequacy. Stress testing shall involve identifying possible events or future changes in economic conditions that could have unfavourable effects on an institution's credit exposures and assessment of the institution's ability to withstand such changes. 2. An institution shall regularly perform a credit risk stress test to assess the effect of certain specific conditions on its total capital requirements for credit risk. The test shall be one chosen by the institution, subject to supervisory review. The test to be employed shall be meaningful and consider the effects of severe, but plausible, recession scenarios. An institution shall assess migration in its ratings under the stress test scenarios. Stressed portfolios shall contain the vast majority of an institution's total exposure. 2a. The scenarios used under paragraph 2 shall also include ESG risk drivers, in particular physical risk and transition risk drivers stemming from climate change. EBA shall issue guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, on the application of paragraph 2 and 2a. 3. Institutions using the treatment set out in Article 153(3) shall consider as part of their stress testing framework the impact of a deterioration in the credit quality of protection providers, in particular the impact of protection providers falling outside the eligibility criteria.