Home / papers / Interest Rate, Liquidity, and Operational Risks

Interest Rate, Liquidity, and Operational Risks

Introduction

The banking industry is exposed to different types of risks including the interest rate, liquidity, and operational risks. Accommodating these types of risks is a usual element of the banking industry and it may be a vital source of shareholder value and increasing profits (Bérubé, 2013). However, extreme ranges of these risks can present a considerable danger to a bank’s operation if they are not managed well. The main goal of this paper is to explore interest rate, liquidity, and operational risks in the Standard Chartered Bank. The paper will explain the sources, measuring methods and management of these risks. Additionally the paper will explain how to conduct a framework for fraud risk assessment in relation to the three risks in the Standard Chartered Bank.

Interest Rate Risk

Under the economic theory, the rate of interest can be defined as the price of risk and time (Mehta, 2012). That is the return rate paid by a borrower of finances to the lender of the finances. Interest rates differ depending on a number of factors; some of the main factors include variation in the time that is maturity and the extent of risk related with diverse financial instrument. The loanable funds theory (Demand and supply), expectations of the market, monetary policy, and government borrowing are factors that affect interest rate variation (Osborne, 2004). An additionally factor is the variation in transaction costs that is economies of scale. The interest rate risk occurs when alterations in interest rates sources either increased costs of borrowing funds or decreased investment income than anticipated. When Standard Chartered Bank borrows, lends, or invests funds at a rate of interest it is subjected to interest rate risk it is therefore important to identify the sources, measuring methods, and management of the interest rate risk to avoid the reliability and well being of Standard Chartered Bank (Holmquist, 2008).

Being a financial mediator, Standard Chartered Bank experiences interest rate risk in a number of ways. Some of these sources of risks include repricing or maturity mismatch risk. The maturity mismatch between on balance-sheet possessions and liabilities and off-balance instruments results in the occurrence of the reprising threat (Inanoglu et al, 2014). The repricing risk is one of the main forms of interest rate risks encountered by Standard Chartered Bank. Some of the methods used to analyze this risk include gap, duration, and scenario analysis (Santeramo et al, 2014). The second source of the interest rate risk is the basis risk. This type risk arises from variation in the association between the yields or yield curves of short and long situations with similar maturity in diverse financial instruments. This implies that the short and long positions do not enclose one another. The risk also occurs from variation in interest rate spread association amid derivative and cash derivatives. For instance, basis risk may occur if the spread between a twelve week LIBOR and twelve weeks Treasury varies (Michael, 2014). This variation will influence the total interest gap of Standard Chartered Bank because of variation in the spreads attained or compensated on repriced instruments at a particular time.

The third source of interest risk is the yield curve. This type of risk arises when the yield curve has non-parallel shifts (butterfly shifts). These shifts include inverse, flattening, or steepening yield curve and variations in the model of the yield curve. The fourth source of interest rate risk is the option risk. This threat occurs when a client of the Standard Chartered Bank has the right but not the commitment to affect extent and timing of the flow of money of a possession, off-balance-sheet, or liability. A number of mortgages services and products offer the lender the choice to pay back the funds early without any fines. These mortgages early paybacks have the tendency to increase this result to decrease in interest rates leading to elevated levels of the interest rate risks.

Different methods can be used by the Standard Chartered Bank to measure their exposure to interest rate risks. These methods include the gap report. In this technique, the differences may be made among positions with unknown maturities that are not sensitive with interest and those sensitive (Rowe et al, 2004). When the interest earning is sensitive to changes in interest rates of the market, they are assigned to maturity sections of the gap report that are short duration. Positions with sensitivity have various assigning methods that rely on the postulations made about the behavior of the client. These methods include spreading the position among a number of maturity sections of the gap report. A substitute method is to limit on the utmost maturity of the positions or to assign them in the longest duration maturity section. This method is vital if the positions have the purpose of reducing Standard Chartered Bank economic risk exposure.

Another method of measuring risk is the net income simulation model. In method the consequences of variation of the market interest rates on interest earnings and the capacity of positions of unknown maturities in expression of total interest earnings is estimated. Within diverse conditions, a difference is made among sensitivity of interest rate declining or increasing interest rate of the market. Because a time scope of less than two to three years is normally measured in income stimulation models, they fail to offer information on how positions with unknown maturities act within a longer period. Another method of measuring interest risk in banks is the duration gap model (Ruiz-Porras, 2012). Duration gap is the distinctions in the of interest rates sensitivity of possessions and interest rates sensitivity of liabilities to variation in market interest rates. The model estimates how fit the timings of money flow from possessions and outflows from liabilities. If the duration of possessions is greater compared to that of liabilities the duration gap is positive, this leads to increase in interest rate risks in Standard Chartered Bank.

It is vital for Standard Chartered Bank to manage it risks, including the interest rate risk. In the management of this risk, different techniques can be used including the asset and liability management and derivatives approach (Lowman & Novak, 2002). The asset and liability approach is a planned process of making decisions of matching or intentionally mismatching the mix of liabilities and assets on a bank’s balance sheet. The intention is simulating the behaviour of the balance sheet within a number of interest rate cases. The main goals of this approach is stabilizing total interest earnings, maximizing shareholders’ value through long duration economic income, and ensuring that Standard Chartered Bank have too much risks from maturity mismatching. The second method of management is the use of various derivative financial instruments in the management of the introduction to interest rate risks (Breeden & Whisker, 2010). These instruments include future contracts, options, and interest rate swaps. The future agreement is a contract to buy and trade a quantity and quality product or financial instrument at a particular cost and date. The interest rate swap is an arrangement between two parties to trade interest payments on a particular quantity for a particular duration. Options are arrangements assigning the rights but not obligation to buy or sell a particular commodity at a set cost within a particular duration.

Liquidity Risk

Liquidity is the ability to a balance between cash outflow and inflow over a certain period.  It may also be referred to as the ability to transform possessions into cash shunning away loss of capital or interest fines. Liquidity risk is the threat that Standard Chartered Bank will lack ability to create enough money inflow to meet the required money outflows. Liquidity is important for Standard Chartered Bank because it assists in meeting demand and other cash outflows. It also facilitates in taking benefit of investment chances and profitable loan when obtainable. Insufficient liquidity can bring about solvency challenges even in banks that are profitable. Liquidity arises from maturity and size mismatches of liabilities and possessions. Liquidity gaps consist of surplus and deficit. Deficit occurs when possessions surpasses resources while surplus occurs when liabilities surpasses loans. Therefore, liquidity risks occur if the liabilities surpass the available funds. There are different definitions of liquidity risks these includes market liquidity (Quinn & Smart 2016). This is the capability of the marketers to exchange a certain capacity of securities or possessions without considerably influencing the costs. Monetary liquidity is total liquid possessions that circulate in the economy. Funding liquidity, this refers to the simplicity that financial agents can attain external funds from wholesale and retail markets; this is the capability of a bank to finance its daily procedures. Liquidity in Standard Chartered Bank is the capability of financial institution to meet its instant obligations.

Some of the sources of the liquidity risks include liability side problems. This is where there is a maturity mismatch amid deposits and loans. In Standard Chartered Bank this happens when there are withdraw by depositors and leads to lending of extra finances or liquidation of possessions. Additionally, holding of money deposit involves an opportunity price. In Standard Chartered Bank, systemic and runs challenges can occur due to lack of confidence. This leads to inability to acquire cash market finances (Panait, 2015). The next source of liquidity risk is asset side problems. These problems arise from borrowing obligations. That is when there is default on loans or low demand for additional lending, implying that there is reduction in liabilities and possessions. In addition, when lenders exercise formerly arranged facilities for credits this leads to financing cash outflow by trading possessions, lending, or reduction of money balances. The next source of the liquidity risk is off balance sheet. This is the derivative markets inclusive of speculative change, especially risks in stressful markets states.

Standard Chartered Bank uses different methods in measuring their exposure to liquidity risks. These techniques include the balance sheet liquidity analysis and monitoring of the liquidity gap. The balance sheet liquidity analysis aims at evaluating whether the Standard Chartered Bank has sufficient liquidity to meet its commitments once they are supposed to be paid (Ruiz, 2012).

Below is a balance sheet liquidity analysis for Standard Chartered Bank.

Liquefiable  assets Standard Chartered Bank
Loans and receivables, investments 40m
Trading assets 20m
Reverse repos 20m

 

Liquefiable liabilities Standard Chartered Bank
Non-bank deposits 25m
Certified liabilities 25m
Equity 10m
Unsecured bank deposits or others 25m
Trading liabilities 25m
Repos 15m

 

The second measuring method is the liquid gap. Liquidity gap is the total liquid possessions of an institution. This is a method used by Standard Chartered Bank to recognize the introduction of liquidity depends on a gap duration profiles. The processes involve recognizing of deficits or excess and available deposits or loans. When Standard Chartered Bank has a negative liquidity gap, it should pay attention on money balances and unexpected possible variation in costs. To control liquidity risk under this approach involves a few steps, including the spread of finances over time and the avoidance of the requirement for market funds. Additionally control of liquidity risk involves sustaining cushion of liquid short duration possessions (Davies, 2014).

In Standard Chartered Bank, various sources result to liquidity risk as discussed early. Consequently, after introducing effective liquidity risk measuring techniques it is important to put in place effectual approaches of managing the liquidity risks. The liquidity risk management main objective is to make sure the capability of Standard Chartered Bank to meet unknown money flow commitments that rely on external occurrences and on the behaviour of other agents. Asset (Stored liquidity) management, this involves rising of liquidity from possessions including wholesale and retail loans that are attained through covered bonds issuance and securitisation (Faruk&Alam, 2014). Liability (Purchased liquidity) management, in this type of financing may be of high price for Standard Chartered Bank because it involves settling market rates costs for the funds. This generates elevated prices for funds that are purchased in relation to the rates attained on the possessions, which they are facilitating. There are two main approaches in the management of the liquidity risk management these includes, traditional and the modern approach. In the traditional approach, the reserve asset approach is applicable (Koshkina&Kosenko, 2013). This technique meets its liabilities by using possessions and reserve ratio. For instance, if Standard Chartered Bank is experiencing liquidity threats it can apply the following steps to manage the risk under this approach. These include running down money reserves, trading of securities, and possibility for challenges with business confidence. This approach is effective in the management of the liquidity risks however; the approach has a number of problems. These problems include the use of reserves as adjustments minimize the capability and size to create returns. An additional problem with this method is the high chance price of holding money. In the modern approach, the liability management method is applicable (Ikediashi et al, 2013). In this technique cash-markets are used to continuously finance liabilities, advantage of adjustments are only made on the side of liabilities.  When Standard Chartered Bank is experiencing liquidity threats using this technique, it frequently needs a central bank to take the position of a lender of last option. This approach is effective in the management of liquidity risks in Standard Chartered Bank however it is associated with a number of problems including it depends on extremely liquid wholesale markets and rise in interest rates can result to un-maintainable and unprofitable operations (Quinn & Smart, 2016).

Operational Risk

Operational risk results from the probability that lack of adequate information systems, in operation challenges, internal control breaches, swindle, or unpredictable disasters that will lead to unexpected losses. Operational risk is the possibility of loss that is as a consequences of failed internal processed or lack of adequate interior procedures, individuals as well as the systems or from the external occasions (Burne, 2016). These definitions comprises of human blunder, deception and hatred, let downs from the system of information, challenges relating to the personal administration, business conflicts, accidents, fire, flood and many others.

The operational risk in the Standard Chartered results from four main sources that are explained briefly. Lack of adequate or failed internal processes:  Standard Chartered, being a financial institution function a numerous of procedures in order to reach their products to their clients (Breeden & Whisker, 2010). In the value chain of the business, a process risk can occur at any stage of the production process. For instance, some information materials can be sent to wrong recipients and cases where processing of transactions can be carried out inaccurately. The second source of operational risk is people or individuals. The operational risk Standard Chartered can result from claims of compensation from employees, poor working conditions that violate the worker’s wellbeing and safety rules, improper organization of the labor activities, and claims of discrimination. Human risks can also comprise of lack of enough workers training, poor management, human mistakes, lack of clear task separation, dependence on the top-level management individuals, and lack of integrity, honesty, and delays in salary payments. The third source of operational risk is the failure of system (Ruiz, 2012). The high level of dependence on the Information Technology by the financial institutions is a main source of operational risk. Costly and embarrassing operational errors which are continuous are mainly because of data dishonesty problems, whether by mistakes or intentional. Finally, the other source of operational risk is the external events, which has a minimum of two visible dimensions. The first is when a business approach chosen by the Standard Chartered bank to be pursued exposes the institution to the adverse external events, and the other one, is when independently, the external events impacts the bank origination from the commercial surrounding in which it operates (Lowman & Novak, 2002).

The requirement to have measurements on the operational risk for Standard Chartered bank originates from the recommendation of Basel committee, which demands that all banks to assign a sufficient quantity of funds to protect their institute from occurrence of operational risk. The quantity of funds set aside must match up to the full loss sustained because of the happening of operational risk, with a high likelihood, almost 100%, in a specified period, for example 12 months, though this is only in theory (Breeden & Whisker, 2010). Mostly the concentration is on the autonomous measurement approaches, which do not happen as a consequential from the regulator decision or on those classified as “advanced methods”. The three approaches include statistical approaches, scenario-based methods and scorecard methods, which are discussed in the essay. The “Loss Distribution Approach” (LDA) is the best usual instance on the statistical method. This approach depends on the records from the Standard Chartered bank on the loss occasions and on additional from the external events. The initial phase of the method is the drawing, designed for every commercial line and on every harm occasion, two arcs of the likelihood supply for the harm. Single curve should represent the regularity of the harm occasions in a given period (harm regularity distribution), and the second would represent the harshness of those similar losses (Ramsaran, 2003). Using histogram, the results are represented graphically by sort events of loss by frequency on one side and by cost on the other side. The combination of the two distributions is made by the use of Monte-Carlo simulation with an aim of obtaining an aggregate curve of the distribution of loss for every form of occasion and commercial link for a specified period.

 The Scenario analysis approach includes the survey of every business line and risk management experts with specialists. The objective of this approach is to obtain from the specialists a measurement of likelihood as well as the price of operational events, as it is recognized in the investigative outline suggested by the committee (Quinn & Smart 2016). The scenario analysis approach plays part as valuable complement in case there is no adequate historical information to implement an only statistical method. It is essential for use in the assessment of the consequences of the simple hazard occasions, or the influence of coinciding occasions. The methodology of scorecards contains metrics of performance that keep track of the development in the direction of planned and operational purposes. The scorecards approach in the business process units internally offers the responses on the actions and gives the leaders a chance to make analysis on the threats to productivity. Carrying out the process regularly allows changing in period the quantity of capital apportioned to every line of business (Osborne, 2004). As these assessments completed autonomously of additional commercial zones, it is not a situation where the total of all profits and losses is zero: the universal quantity of governing resources might rise or decline dependent on the marks.

Several supervisory bodies and Basel 11 suggested a number of standards for Standard Chartered bank and monetary institutes for the management of operational risk. In the supplement of those principles, Basel 11 gave guidance to three extensive techniques of capital computation namely basic indicator approach, standardized method, and advanced measurements methods (Osborne, 2004). The basic methodology is the simplest among the three approaches. The Basel 11 demands that all the banks and other financial institutes, for the operational risk, to set funds separately. Under the methodology of the standardized approach, Basel requires all the bank actions to be classified in eight commercial lines: asset management, business funding, exchange transactions, merchandising brokerage, payment & settlement, retail banking, assistance services, and commercial banking. A broad indicator in each business line is the gross income that works for as a substitution for the measure of corporate processes and therefore the prospective measure of operational risk exposure in every business line (Faruk&Alam, 2014). The capital cost is therefore determined by having gross g income multiplied by the aspect allocated to that link of business. Under the advanced measurement, approach all the banks and financial institution are permitted to formulate their own realistic model to compute necessary capital for operational risk (Quinn & Smart, 2016). However, the Standard Charteredbank can develop their models after an approval from their regulator. Immediately the bank gains the approval to advanced measurement approach it cannot go back to the simpler methods unless through the supervisory approval.

Fraud Risk Assessment

Fraud risk assessment involves the process directed at proactively recognizing and addressing weaknesses of organization (Standard Chartered) to fraud. The process of fraud risk assessment will vary depending on the organization since every organization varies in components and operations. The organizational fraud risk regularly change, its therefore important for any organization to have an assessment on fraud risk. For having an effective fraud protection system, it is important that the administration must initially identify the frauds that effect their organization. The fraud risk assessment begins with the recognition and arrangement of the fraud risk that are in the business. The process progresses due to that recognition and prioritization starts to drive communication, education, organizational alignment, and activities within, efficiently managing fraud risks and recognizing fresh fraud risks as they develop. The purpose of an organization to conduct a fraud risk assessments is to have their shareholders and assets protected from fraud. It can also be conducted to fulfil the regulatory necessities, meeting the standards of professionalism, and to adhere to the values and beliefs that are ethically set by the organization. In choosing an effective framework, the team conducting the fraud risk assessment should make sure that the framework is designed, personalised and balanced, with the particular requirements and culture of the business in consideration (Osborne, 2004). In the fraud risk assessment, there are two approaches namely: systematic method and second method makes use of fraud risk index and the leadership risk profile as the basis for risk assessment.

In the systematic method, the first step is identification of possible fraud risks in the Standard Chartered. The discussions should rotate round the incentives, stresses, and chances to commit fraud, risk administration’s take precedence over of controls, supervisory and lawful misbehaviour, reputation risk, and risk to data technology. The next step is the assessment of the probability of the fraud happening. The probability of each fraud risk occurrence can be grouped into three, that is, remote, probable, and reasonably possible. The fraud assessment team in Standard Chartered should consider several factors. The historical incidences of certain in the Standard Charteredbank, the level of complexity of the fraud, and the ethics of the organization as well as its culture are some of the factors to be considered (Quinn & Smart, 2016). The next step is the assessing the fraud risk importance to the business considering such factors as; significance of financial statements, the monetary situation of the business, the worthiness of the assets under threat, and the income derived from the threatened assets. The next procedure is the evaluation of the individuals, departments, and the possible ways of committing the fraud. Identification and mapping of both preventive and detective controls in existence is another step. A favourable system with the correct stable of preventive and detective controls can highly reduce the weakness of the bank to the fraud(Ramsaran, 2003).The subsequent step should be the evaluation of how effective and efficient the pointed out controls are. The last step on the step-to-step method is the identification and evaluation of the residue fraud risks. The structure of internal control should be considered, which might disclose certain residual fraud risks.

The fraud risk index is one of the second approaches, which refers to the whole assessment of fraud risk for the business association founded on three elements. Those elements in Standard Chartered includes the environmental risk index, the culture quotient, and to detect or prevent the index. The environmental risk index involves the assessment of macro-level indicators of fraud risk that are capable of affecting the weakness of the organization to fraud (Breeden &Whisker, 2010). The factors included here are the pressures on theStandard Chartered bank, internal control system of the organization, the rhythm on the top management, and the general strategies the company has implemented in prevention and detection of fraud. The leadership risk profile is established in the banks institution such as Standard Chartered in order to give a macro-level view by the organization of how the leadership team, if any, raises the weaknesses of the organization to fraud through their working behaviours, leadership styles, and decision making put into practise. For instance, the failures in Standard Chartered Bank that happened in the years between 1979 and 1989, that there was a report that 90% failure was because of the poor management (Lowman & Novak 2002). Even if most of the factors that made the banks to decline were externally induced, the primary responsibility of those failures fell on the hands of the board of directors and the managers.

The team carrying out fraud risk assessment in Standard Chartered should come up with or acquire an organizational chart, which will clearly express the structure of the organization and categorize its leaders. The team should therefore develop a profile for every leader to examine the fraud risk related to each of their leadership style. The exposure to fraud risk should be examined regularly over a specified period by the organization in order to identify particular probable schemes and the events that require the organization to mitigate them (Ruiz, 2012). The institutions can recognize fraud risks and assess them in combination with the entire organization risk assessment or on a stand-alone base. After the fraud risk assessment has been carried out and fully established, there is a need to monitor it on a regular base to make sure it remains effective (Breeden & Whisker, 2010). The management of fraud risk in Standard Chartered includes the action of identifying, prioritizing, treating, and monitoring of risks, which shakes the capabilities of the organization to offer value to its stakeholders. It is not possible and practical to eliminate all the fraud risks in the organization; therefore, the administration should establish an acceptable level of risk. The management of Standard Charteredshould seek ways in which the frauds affects the goal of the organization and make choices on where to best employ the resources to detect and protect the frauds in response to the fraud risk identified during the assessment (Burne, 2016).

In conclusion, there are risks that the Standard Chartered bank and other financial institutions face. Such risks include liquidity risks, interest rate risks, and operational risks. There are various sources of such risks. The sources includes, reprising, yield curve, basis, optionality, liability side, asset side, off balance sheet, people, systems, external events, and Inadequate or failed internal processes. There are certain measures carried to quantify the amount of the risk exposure to the bank. Such measures include reprising model, maturity model, duration model, convexity, monitoring the liquidity gap, quantitative balance sheet analysis. There are approaches carried out in the organization for managing the risks. There is a need for Standard Chartered bank and other similar financial institutions to conduct a fraud risk assessment.The purpose of an organization to conduct a fraud risk assessments is to have their shareholders and assets protected from fraud.

 

References

Burne, K. (2016, Mar 15). New York fed exec outlines bank’s strategy for managing in-house risks; joshuarosenberg says procedures inside the regulator’s business units are first line of defense. Wall Street Journal (Online) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1773265016?accountid=45049?accountid=45049

Quinn, M., & Smart, T. (2016, Mar 11). Assessing the less contemplated risks of bank placement agreements.Bond Buyer Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1773271523?accountid=45049?accountid=45049

Panait, N. G. (2015). Considerations regarding the management strategies of bank risks. Global Economic Observer, 3(2), 100-105

Wei, S. (2015). Wealth management products in the context of china’s shadow banking: Systemic risks, consumer protection, and regulatory instruments. Asia Pacific Law Review, 23(1), 91-121

Sterland, C. (2014). Co-op bank warns of risks after losing £1.3bn in 2013. Operational Risk & Regulation, 15(4), 10

Inanoglu, H., Jacobs, M., J.R., &Karagozoglu, A. K. (2014).Bank capital and new regulatory requirements for risks in trading portfolios.The Journal of Fixed Income, 23(4), 71-88,4

Faruk, M. O., &Alam, R. (2014).Asset liability management of a commercial bank- A study on prime bank limited.International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 6(1), 106-128.

Jiangsu henglihighpressure oil cylinder co. ltd. — announcement on planning to use self-owned idle funds of not more than RMB300 million to invest in bank short-term wealth management products

Bérubé, G. (2013). BANK LIQUIDITY RISKS.Benefits Canada, 37(2), 32-34.

Mehta, V. H. (2012, Dec 23). Understanding how your bank balances risks. Businessline Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1322990342?accountid=45049?accountid=45049

Korzenik, J. D. (2012). Managing needs and risks of private bank clients.Bank Investment Consultant, 20(6), 23

Ruiz-Porras, A. (2012). Financial competition and the management of banking risks. IUP Journal of Financial Risk Management, 9(1), 28-42.

Driga, I. (2012). FINANCIAL RISKS ANALYSIS FOR A COMMERCIAL BANK IN THE ROMANIAN BANKING SYSTEM. AnnalesUniversitatisApulensis : Series Oeconomica, 14(1), 164-177.

Kirtskhalia, N. (2010, Jun 04). IFC helps bank of Georgia with currency risks management. Trend Capital.English Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/357226045?accountid=45049?accountid=45049

Breeden, S., & Whisker, R. (2010).Collateral risk management at the bank of England.Bank of England.Quarterly Bulletin, 50(2), 94-103.

Cojocaru, C., &Starparu, L. (2009).The cognitive function of the accounting information in bank management risks. Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition, (2), 223-227.

Cojocaru, C., &Starparu, L. (2009).The role of e-banking in managing the bank risks.Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition, (1), 91-95.

Sensarma, R., &Jayadev, M. (2009). Are bank stocks sensitive to risk management? The Journal of Risk Finance, 10(1), 7-22. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/15265940910924463

Hughes, J., & Strauss, D. (2008, Jul 03). Bank’s deputy warns on inflation risks. Financial Times Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/248315413?accountid=45049?accountid=45049

Holmquist, E. (2008). Assessing and reporting technology risks to senior management. The RMA Journal, 90(5), 40-44,9.

Dorminey, J., &Mohn, R. (2007). A model for not-for-profit enterprise risk management: ERM at the federal reserve bank of richmond. The Journal of Government Financial Management, 56(1), 50-57.

Osborne, P. R. (2004). Sarbanes-oxley spurs risk management focus in bank compliance. ABA Bank Compliance, 25(3), 3-4.

Rowe, D., Jovic, D., & Reeves, R. (2004). Bank capital management in the light of basel II. Journal of Performance Management, 17(1), 15-25.

Davies, P. J. (2015, Nov 03). Standard chartered’s winters risks leaving investors cold; the bank is raising $5.1 billion of equity to fund a strategy that looks underwhelming. Wall Street Journal (Online) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1729016968?accountid=45049

Faruk, M. O., &Alam, R. (2014).Asset liability management of a commercial bank- A study on prime bank limited. International Journal of Information, Business and Management, 6(1), 106-128. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1511381892?accountid=45049

Ikediashi, D. I., Ogunlana, S. O., & Godfrey, U. (2013). Structural equation model for analysing critical risks associated with facilities management outsourcing and its impact on firm performance. Journal of Facilities Management, 11(4), 323-338. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JFM-10-2012-0046

Koshkina, G. M., &Kosenko, R. V. (2013).MANAGEMENT OF CREDIT RISKS OF THE MANAGING SUBJECT. Paper presented at the 62. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1542108421?accountid=45049

Michael, O. B. (2014). Strategic management analysis of a nigerian firm: Evidences from the first bank of nigeria (FBN) group. Journal of Accounting, Finance & Management Strategy, 9(1), 51-73.

Panait, N. G. (2015). CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES OF BANK RISKS. Global Economic Observer, 3(2), 100-105.

Quinn, M., & Smart, T. (2016, Mar 11). Assessing the less contemplated risks of bank placement agreements.Bond Buyer Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1773271523?accountid=45049

Santeramo, F. G., Capitanio, F., &Adinolfi, F. (2014).Integrating agricultural risks management strategies in selected EU partner countries: Syria, Tunisia, turkey.Romanian Journal of European Affairs, 14(3), 22-35. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1561632715?accountid=45049

 

RELATED: Interest Rates and Bond Valuation

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Top