Diss.--Copenhagen Business School, 2007.

South Africa will be implementing Basel II on 1 January 2008. Basel II provides regulatory capital requirements for credit risk, market risk and operational risk. The purpose of capital requirements is to level the playing field for all internationally active banks and to protect consumers against these risks. Although there is an obvious threat of liquidity risk and it is important to correctly measure and manage liquidity risk, it is almost glaringly omitted from Basel II. The result of not managing liquidity risk properly may have dire consequences for banks because a liquidity crisis may happen without warning. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore current practices and to propose guidelines for effective liquidity risk regulation in South Africa. A literature study and quantitative analysis on liquidity risk in South Africa were conducted to assess whether it is valid for regulators to require banks to hold capital for liquidity risk. This study provides conclusions and recommendations on the regulatory treatment of liquidity risk in South Africa under Basel II. Although Pillar 2 reviews a variety of other risks and not only liquidity risk, it is proposed that the liquidity risk part of such reviews is conducted on the basis of a questionnaire used to determine possible gaps between banks' practices and prescribed criteria regarding the management and measurement of liquidity risk. It is important to note that such an approach has a constraint in terms of the substantial amount of work that would have to be done on the regulation of liquidity risk by both regulators and banks. Therefore resource constraints and the cost versus the benefit of such an approach would have to be considered carefully. The all-encompassing conclusion to this study is that capital would not be an effective mitigant for liquidity risk for a number of reasons. Liquidity risk differs from bank to bank and a general capital charge for all banks may not be sensible, therefore liquidity risk should be analysed on a bank-by-bank basis. In other words, capital could be charged for liquidity risk under Pillar 2(b) of Basel II. Such a capital charge would not serve the purpose of covering losses resulting from liquidity risk, but would instead impose a penalty on banks that are deemed to manage and measure liquidity risk imprudently. Such a penalty would typically be quite small but would serve as an incentive for banks to improve their management and measurement techniques to the desired level as set out by prescribed criteria. The criteria that should be used for determining whether banks measure and manage liquidity risk prudently should be of such a nature that the Bank Supervision Department (BSD) of the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) complies with Basel Core Principle 14: Liquidity Risk in regulating liquidity risk. In addition, it should align the criteria used to the 14 Principles for the sound management of liquidity as prescribed by the Bank for International Settlements and the Institute of International Finance. Furthermore, it is proposed that the BSD should not prescribe to banks which methods to use to report their liquidity risk, because all banks are not the same in terms of size and sophistication. For this reason, banks should be allowed to follow an internal models approach for liquidity risk whereby banks are, subject to regulatory approval, allowed to use their own internal liquidity risk measures to report liquidity risk to the BSD. This approach is similar to the approach followed by the Bundesbank in Germany. A liquidity risk questionnaire could be drafted according to which banks' liquidity risk management and measurement is assessed in terms of the sound Principles for managing liquidity risk and the Basel Core Principles. One questionnaire could be used for the purposes of assessing the quality of banks' liquidity risk management and measurement in terms of a Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP) as well as for banks applying for approval of an internal models approach for liquidity risk. The same questionnaire could be used for both purposes, or the questionnaire could be divided into two clear sections whereby all banks are required to answer the SREP (or Pillar 2(b)) section, and only banks applying for the use of an internal models approach for liquidity risk are required to complete this section. A further conclusion to this study is that the BSD should publish a framework in which its approach to regulating liquidity risk is described in detail. Some aspects that should be included in such a document include a widely-accepted definition for liquidity risk and guidelines/minimum standards for measurement and management techniques for liquidity risk and the process that will be followed under Pillar 2 of Basel II. If the BSD is concerned about the level of potential liquidity risk in the South African banking system, it should consider having the additional instruments that are eligible as collateral included as instruments eligible for liquid asset reserve requirements. An additional mitigant for liquidity risk may be that the BSD requires banks to report their liquidity risk more frequently than the current monthly basis. / Thesis (M.Com. (Risk Management))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2008.

A topical issue in financial economics is the development of appropriate stochastic dynamic models for banking items and behavior. The issue here is to fulfil the need to generalize the more traditional discrete-time models of banking activity to a Levy process setting. In this thesis, under the assumption that the loan market is imperfectly competitive, we investigate the evolution of banking items such as bank assets (cash, bonds, shares, Treasuries, reserves, loans and intangible assets), liabilities (demand deposits) and bank capital (bank equity, subordinate debt and loan loss reserves). Here we consider the influence of macroeconomic factors and profitability as well as its indicators return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE). As far as bank assets are concerned, we note that loan pricing models usually reflect the financial funding cost, risk premium to compensate for the risk of default by the borrower, a premium reflecting market power exercised by the bank and the sensitivity of the cost of capital raised to changes in loans extended. On the other hand, loan losses can be associated with an offsetting expense called the loan loss provision (LLP), which is charged against Nett profit. This offset will reduce reported income but has no impact on taxes, although when the assets are finally written off, a tax-deductible expense is created. An important factor influencing loan loss provisioning is regulation and supervision. Measures of capital adequacy are generally calculated using the book values of assets and equity. The provisioning of loans and their associated write-offs will cause a decline in these capital adequacy measures, and may precipitate increased regulation by bank authorities. Greater level of regulation generally entail additional costs for the bank. Currently, this regulation mainly takes the form of the Basel II Capital Accord that has been implemented on the worldwide basis since 2008. It is clear that bank profitability is a major indicator of financial crises for households, companies and financial institutions. An example of this from the 2007-2008 subprime mortgage crisis (SMC) is the U.S. bank, Wachovia Corp., who reported a big loss as from the first quarter of 2007 and eventually was bought by the world's largest bank, Citigroup, on 29 September 2008. A further example from the SMC is that both the failure of the Lehman Brothers investment bank and the acquisition in September 2008 of Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns by Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase, respectively, were preceded by a decrease in profitability and an increase in the price of loans and loan losses. The subprime mortgage crisis is characterized by contracted liquidity in the global credit markets and banking system. The level of liquidity in the banking sector affects the ability of banks to meet commitments as they become due without incurring substantial losses from liquidating less liquid assets. Liquidity, therefore, provides the defensive cash or near-cash resources to cover banks' liability. An undervaluation of real risk in the subprime market is cascading, rippling and ultimately severely adversely affecting the world economy. The downturn in the U.S. housing market, risky lending and borrowing practices, and excessive individual and corporate debt levels have caused multiple adverse effects tumbled as the US housing market slumped. Banks worldwide are hoarding cash and showing a growing reluctance to lend, driving rates that institutions charge to each other on loans to record highs. Also, global money markets are inoperative, forcing increased injections of cash from central banks. The crisis has passed through various stages, exposing pervasive weaknesses in the global financial system and regulatory framework. The stochastic dynamics of the aforementioned banking items assist in formulating a maximization problem that involves endogenous variables such as profit consumption, the value of the bank's investment in loans and provisions for loan losses as control variants. In particular, we demonstrate that the bank is able to maximize its expected utility of discounted profit consumption over a random time interval, [t,r], and terminal profit at time r. Here the term profit consumption refers to the consumption of the bank's profits by dividend payments on equity and interest and principal payments on subordinate debt. The associated Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation has a smooth solution when the optimal controls are computed by means of power, logarithmic and exponential utility functions. This enables us to make a direct comparison between the economic properties of the solutions for different choices of the utility function. In keeping with the main theme of this thesis, we simulate the financial indices ROE and ROA that are two measures of bank profitability. We further discuss optimization with power utility where we show the convergence of the Markov Chain Approximation Method (MCAM) and the impact of varying the model parameters in the form of loan loss severity, P, and loan loss frequency, <f>. We investigate the connections between the banking models and Basel II capital accord as well as the current subprime mortgage crises. As a way of conclusion, we provide remarks about the main issues discussed in the thesis and speculate about future research directions. The contents of this thesis is based on 3 peer-reviewed journal articles (see [105], [106] and [107]) and 1 peer-reviewed conference proceedings paper (see [104]). In addition, the paper [108] is currently being prepared for submission to an accredited journal. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Applied Mathematics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.

South Africa will be implementing Basel II on 1 January 2008. Basel II provides regulatory capital requirements for credit risk, market risk and operational risk. The purpose of capital requirements is to level the playing field for all internationally active banks and to protect consumers against these risks. Although there is an obvious threat of liquidity risk and it is important to correctly measure and manage liquidity risk, it is almost glaringly omitted from Basel II. The result of not managing liquidity risk properly may have dire consequences for banks because a liquidity crisis may happen without warning. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore current practices and to propose guidelines for effective liquidity risk regulation in South Africa. A literature study and quantitative analysis on liquidity risk in South Africa were conducted to assess whether it is valid for regulators to require banks to hold capital for liquidity risk. This study provides conclusions and recommendations on the regulatory treatment of liquidity risk in South Africa under Basel II. Although Pillar 2 reviews a variety of other risks and not only liquidity risk, it is proposed that the liquidity risk part of such reviews is conducted on the basis of a questionnaire used to determine possible gaps between banks' practices and prescribed criteria regarding the management and measurement of liquidity risk. It is important to note that such an approach has a constraint in terms of the substantial amount of work that would have to be done on the regulation of liquidity risk by both regulators and banks. Therefore resource constraints and the cost versus the benefit of such an approach would have to be considered carefully. The all-encompassing conclusion to this study is that capital would not be an effective mitigant for liquidity risk for a number of reasons. Liquidity risk differs from bank to bank and a general capital charge for all banks may not be sensible, therefore liquidity risk should be analysed on a bank-by-bank basis. In other words, capital could be charged for liquidity risk under Pillar 2(b) of Basel II. Such a capital charge would not serve the purpose of covering losses resulting from liquidity risk, but would instead impose a penalty on banks that are deemed to manage and measure liquidity risk imprudently. Such a penalty would typically be quite small but would serve as an incentive for banks to improve their management and measurement techniques to the desired level as set out by prescribed criteria. The criteria that should be used for determining whether banks measure and manage liquidity risk prudently should be of such a nature that the Bank Supervision Department (BSD) of the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) complies with Basel Core Principle 14: Liquidity Risk in regulating liquidity risk. In addition, it should align the criteria used to the 14 Principles for the sound management of liquidity as prescribed by the Bank for International Settlements and the Institute of International Finance. Furthermore, it is proposed that the BSD should not prescribe to banks which methods to use to report their liquidity risk, because all banks are not the same in terms of size and sophistication. For this reason, banks should be allowed to follow an internal models approach for liquidity risk whereby banks are, subject to regulatory approval, allowed to use their own internal liquidity risk measures to report liquidity risk to the BSD. This approach is similar to the approach followed by the Bundesbank in Germany. A liquidity risk questionnaire could be drafted according to which banks' liquidity risk management and measurement is assessed in terms of the sound Principles for managing liquidity risk and the Basel Core Principles. One questionnaire could be used for the purposes of assessing the quality of banks' liquidity risk management and measurement in terms of a Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP) as well as for banks applying for approval of an internal models approach for liquidity risk. The same questionnaire could be used for both purposes, or the questionnaire could be divided into two clear sections whereby all banks are required to answer the SREP (or Pillar 2(b)) section, and only banks applying for the use of an internal models approach for liquidity risk are required to complete this section. A further conclusion to this study is that the BSD should publish a framework in which its approach to regulating liquidity risk is described in detail. Some aspects that should be included in such a document include a widely-accepted definition for liquidity risk and guidelines/minimum standards for measurement and management techniques for liquidity risk and the process that will be followed under Pillar 2 of Basel II. If the BSD is concerned about the level of potential liquidity risk in the South African banking system, it should consider having the additional instruments that are eligible as collateral included as instruments eligible for liquid asset reserve requirements. An additional mitigant for liquidity risk may be that the BSD requires banks to report their liquidity risk more frequently than the current monthly basis. / Thesis (M.Com. (Risk Management))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2008.

A topical issue in financial economics is the development of appropriate stochastic dynamic models for banking items and behavior. The issue here is to fulfil the need to generalize the more traditional discrete-time models of banking activity to a Levy process setting. In this thesis, under the assumption that the loan market is imperfectly competitive, we investigate the evolution of banking items such as bank assets (cash, bonds, shares, Treasuries, reserves, loans and intangible assets), liabilities (demand deposits) and bank capital (bank equity, subordinate debt and loan loss reserves). Here we consider the influence of macroeconomic factors and profitability as well as its indicators return on assets (ROA) and return on equity (ROE). As far as bank assets are concerned, we note that loan pricing models usually reflect the financial funding cost, risk premium to compensate for the risk of default by the borrower, a premium reflecting market power exercised by the bank and the sensitivity of the cost of capital raised to changes in loans extended. On the other hand, loan losses can be associated with an offsetting expense called the loan loss provision (LLP), which is charged against Nett profit. This offset will reduce reported income but has no impact on taxes, although when the assets are finally written off, a tax-deductible expense is created. An important factor influencing loan loss provisioning is regulation and supervision. Measures of capital adequacy are generally calculated using the book values of assets and equity. The provisioning of loans and their associated write-offs will cause a decline in these capital adequacy measures, and may precipitate increased regulation by bank authorities. Greater level of regulation generally entail additional costs for the bank. Currently, this regulation mainly takes the form of the Basel II Capital Accord that has been implemented on the worldwide basis since 2008. It is clear that bank profitability is a major indicator of financial crises for households, companies and financial institutions. An example of this from the 2007-2008 subprime mortgage crisis (SMC) is the U.S. bank, Wachovia Corp., who reported a big loss as from the first quarter of 2007 and eventually was bought by the world's largest bank, Citigroup, on 29 September 2008. A further example from the SMC is that both the failure of the Lehman Brothers investment bank and the acquisition in September 2008 of Merrill Lynch and Bear Stearns by Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase, respectively, were preceded by a decrease in profitability and an increase in the price of loans and loan losses. The subprime mortgage crisis is characterized by contracted liquidity in the global credit markets and banking system. The level of liquidity in the banking sector affects the ability of banks to meet commitments as they become due without incurring substantial losses from liquidating less liquid assets. Liquidity, therefore, provides the defensive cash or near-cash resources to cover banks' liability. An undervaluation of real risk in the subprime market is cascading, rippling and ultimately severely adversely affecting the world economy. The downturn in the U.S. housing market, risky lending and borrowing practices, and excessive individual and corporate debt levels have caused multiple adverse effects tumbled as the US housing market slumped. Banks worldwide are hoarding cash and showing a growing reluctance to lend, driving rates that institutions charge to each other on loans to record highs. Also, global money markets are inoperative, forcing increased injections of cash from central banks. The crisis has passed through various stages, exposing pervasive weaknesses in the global financial system and regulatory framework. The stochastic dynamics of the aforementioned banking items assist in formulating a maximization problem that involves endogenous variables such as profit consumption, the value of the bank's investment in loans and provisions for loan losses as control variants. In particular, we demonstrate that the bank is able to maximize its expected utility of discounted profit consumption over a random time interval, [t,r], and terminal profit at time r. Here the term profit consumption refers to the consumption of the bank's profits by dividend payments on equity and interest and principal payments on subordinate debt. The associated Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) equation has a smooth solution when the optimal controls are computed by means of power, logarithmic and exponential utility functions. This enables us to make a direct comparison between the economic properties of the solutions for different choices of the utility function. In keeping with the main theme of this thesis, we simulate the financial indices ROE and ROA that are two measures of bank profitability. We further discuss optimization with power utility where we show the convergence of the Markov Chain Approximation Method (MCAM) and the impact of varying the model parameters in the form of loan loss severity, P, and loan loss frequency, <f>. We investigate the connections between the banking models and Basel II capital accord as well as the current subprime mortgage crises. As a way of conclusion, we provide remarks about the main issues discussed in the thesis and speculate about future research directions. The contents of this thesis is based on 3 peer-reviewed journal articles (see [105], [106] and [107]) and 1 peer-reviewed conference proceedings paper (see [104]). In addition, the paper [108] is currently being prepared for submission to an accredited journal. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Applied Mathematics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2009.

台灣已於2007年初正式實施新巴塞爾資本協定(BASEL II)之相關規範，此協定透過三大支柱，強化銀行整體之風險管理，為了使我國金融體系與制度能與國際接軌，金融監理機關已發布相關管理方法與計算方式，以加強其政策面與實務面之配合，而銀行也針對其風險管理制度，進行模型建構與測試，並透過定性及定量等公開揭露，使資本適足率之計算更具風險敏感性，落實市場監督功能。 本研究利用文獻分析與整理，對新巴塞爾資本協定作一整體性之探討與介紹，並針對信用風險之規範，透過訪談，以國內某國際商業銀行為例，描述其建置信用風險管理組織架構過程及目前實施概況。惟當前多數之國內金融機構尚未具有直接實施內部評等法的條件，客戶亦多為國內中小型企業，造成信用評等取得不易，又因為成本與人力分配之考量，導致其實施內部評等法之誘因不足，因此實施近兩年來，銀行仍多採行信用風險標準法。 本論文針對此現象，將分別由銀行與監理機關兩個面向進行探討並提出相關建議，國內各銀行不論其信用風險之資本計提方式是使用標準法或準備邁向基礎與進階之內部評等法，皆應在其成本效益及經濟規模之考量下，建置能判斷授信客戶風險之內部評等模型與整體信用風險控管架構；而金融監理機關也應正視此趨勢，主動並積極建立相關之信用風險資料庫，或與聯徵中心合作，加強我國中小企業之信用評等模型，並應儘速培訓信用風險相關人才，以具備判別各銀行內部信用評等模型差異性之能力。 / Basel II has changed the game of the financial system, and the regime started on 1st January 2007 in Taiwan. The new regulatory capital framework provides incentives for a stronger risk management and makes regulatory capital much closer to economic capital. Furthermore, it relies more on high quality and accurate data, which requires convergence of risk and financial data, information and reporting. However, since the financial crisis began in mid-2007, the majority of losses and most of the build up of leverage occurred not only in the banking but the trading book. An important factor was that the current capital framework for both credit and market risks, a subject whose importance is gaining momentum among the bank these days. The Basel II Accord requires banks to keep capital for Credit risk for banking book exposures and Market risk for trading book exposures. As a result, the bank may be forced to hold more capital than current rules demand to guard against losses on some kind of complex financial products. Taiwan Financial Supervisory Commission has decided to implement Basel II starting from 2007 and the implementation has resulted in a significant impact in the banking industry in Taiwan. However, two years later, most of the banks in Taiwan are still using the standard method to calculate its Credit Risk. By consulting and investigating the Basel II implementation in some representative local banks in Taiwan, this research find some issues and presents several suggestions of the BASEL II implementation in Taiwan.

Fachhochsch., Diplomarbeit--Merseburg, 2007.

Univ., Diss.--Duisburg-Essen, 2007.

O desenvolvimento econômico de um país tem, entre seus pilares, o consumo das famílias como fomento à atividade econômica. Desse modo, a atividade de intermediação financeira, típica da atividade bancária, executa o papel de aproximar o crédito do consumo, portanto contribuindo para o crescimento da economia. Com o tempo, as atividades financeiras tornaram-se complexas e riscos se originam associados a este cenário, entre os quais, o risco operacional. O risco operacional, por definição, resulta da perda em processos internos organizacionais, de falhas de pessoas, de sistemas inadequados ou de fraudes. Assim, para regular o ambiente de riscos e manter a saúde financeira das instituições financeiras, o Acordo de Basileia II, editado em 2004, trouxe parâmetros que definem premissas e modelos para o gerenciamento dos riscos e, em particular, do risco operacional. O Brasil, por sua vez, aderiu ao Basileia II e estabeleceu o primeiro semestre de 2013 para que as exigências de capital, para cobertura de riscos operacionais, passassem a vigorar. Nessa linha, este estudo apresenta uma pesquisa exploratória, aplicada a um caso múltiplo nas Financeiras do Rio Grande do Sul, com a utilização de técnicas estatísticas (descritiva, séries temporais e cálculos de probabilidades), combinadas com equações dos modelos de Basileia, onde identificam-se as estruturas de gerenciamentos de riscos operacionais, as perdas de natureza operacional e os Modelos de Basileia utilizados pelas Financeiras do RS; bem como, os respectivos resultados da combinação das perdas operacionais com os volumes alocados de capital. Por fim, conclui que os Modelos de Basileia utilizados, pelas Financeiras pesquisadas, estão em desacordo com as realidades de perdas operacionais experimentadas, portanto, sugerindo recomendações e melhorias em trabalhos futuros. / Submitted by Marcelo Teixeira (mvteixeira@ucs.br) on 2014-05-06T13:02:12Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertacao Edeni Malta da Silva.pdf: 1717259 bytes, checksum: 03b2871965612692c230202c9cfb5668 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2014-05-06T13:02:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertacao Edeni Malta da Silva.pdf: 1717259 bytes, checksum: 03b2871965612692c230202c9cfb5668 (MD5) / The economic development of a country has, among its pillars, household consumption as encouraging economic activity. Thus, the financial intermediation activity, typical of banking, performs the role of bringing the credit consumption, thus contributing to the economy growth. Over time, financial activities have become complex and associated risks arise from this scenario, including the operational risk. Operational risk , by definition, results in loss of internal organizational processes, failure of people, inadequate systems or frauds. Thus, to regulate risk environment and maintain the financial health of the financial institutions, the Basel II Accord, published in 2004, brought parameters that define assumptions and models for risk management and, in particular, the operational risk . Brazil joined the Basel II and established the first half of 2013 for the capital requirements to cover operational risk. So, this study presents an exploratory research applied to multiple case, on the Financeiras of the Rio Grande do Sul, with the use of statistical techniques (descriptive, time series and probability calculations) combined with Basel models equations, that identified: the structures of operational risk management, the loss operational and the Basel models used by Financeiras RS, as well as the results of the combination of operating losses with volumes allocated capital. Finally, it concludes that the Basel models used by the financial surveyed, are at odds with the realities of experienced operating losses, thus suggesting improvements and recommendations for future work.

O desenvolvimento econômico de um país tem, entre seus pilares, o consumo das famílias como fomento à atividade econômica. Desse modo, a atividade de intermediação financeira, típica da atividade bancária, executa o papel de aproximar o crédito do consumo, portanto contribuindo para o crescimento da economia. Com o tempo, as atividades financeiras tornaram-se complexas e riscos se originam associados a este cenário, entre os quais, o risco operacional. O risco operacional, por definição, resulta da perda em processos internos organizacionais, de falhas de pessoas, de sistemas inadequados ou de fraudes. Assim, para regular o ambiente de riscos e manter a saúde financeira das instituições financeiras, o Acordo de Basileia II, editado em 2004, trouxe parâmetros que definem premissas e modelos para o gerenciamento dos riscos e, em particular, do risco operacional. O Brasil, por sua vez, aderiu ao Basileia II e estabeleceu o primeiro semestre de 2013 para que as exigências de capital, para cobertura de riscos operacionais, passassem a vigorar. Nessa linha, este estudo apresenta uma pesquisa exploratória, aplicada a um caso múltiplo nas Financeiras do Rio Grande do Sul, com a utilização de técnicas estatísticas (descritiva, séries temporais e cálculos de probabilidades), combinadas com equações dos modelos de Basileia, onde identificam-se as estruturas de gerenciamentos de riscos operacionais, as perdas de natureza operacional e os Modelos de Basileia utilizados pelas Financeiras do RS; bem como, os respectivos resultados da combinação das perdas operacionais com os volumes alocados de capital. Por fim, conclui que os Modelos de Basileia utilizados, pelas Financeiras pesquisadas, estão em desacordo com as realidades de perdas operacionais experimentadas, portanto, sugerindo recomendações e melhorias em trabalhos futuros. / The economic development of a country has, among its pillars, household consumption as encouraging economic activity. Thus, the financial intermediation activity, typical of banking, performs the role of bringing the credit consumption, thus contributing to the economy growth. Over time, financial activities have become complex and associated risks arise from this scenario, including the operational risk. Operational risk , by definition, results in loss of internal organizational processes, failure of people, inadequate systems or frauds. Thus, to regulate risk environment and maintain the financial health of the financial institutions, the Basel II Accord, published in 2004, brought parameters that define assumptions and models for risk management and, in particular, the operational risk . Brazil joined the Basel II and established the first half of 2013 for the capital requirements to cover operational risk. So, this study presents an exploratory research applied to multiple case, on the Financeiras of the Rio Grande do Sul, with the use of statistical techniques (descriptive, time series and probability calculations) combined with Basel models equations, that identified: the structures of operational risk management, the loss operational and the Basel models used by Financeiras RS, as well as the results of the combination of operating losses with volumes allocated capital. Finally, it concludes that the Basel models used by the financial surveyed, are at odds with the realities of experienced operating losses, thus suggesting improvements and recommendations for future work.