TY - JOUR
T1 - Climate transition risk in U.S. loan portfolios
T2 - Are all banks the same?
AU - Nguyen, Quyen
AU - Diaz-Rainey, Ivan
AU - Kuruppuarachchi, Duminda
AU - McCarten, Matthew
AU - Tan, Eric K.M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Quyen Nguyen acknowledges funding from an Otago Business School Strategic Scholarship. Matthew McCarten did some of the work on this paper while at the University of Oxford. The paper has benefitted from comments received at the Department of Accountancy and Finance Seminar Series (University of Otago, 2019), the 1st CEFGroup Climate Finance Symposium (University of Otago, 2020), the 4th GRASFI-INSPIRE-NGFS Research Webinar (Online, 2021)), and the International Review of Financial Analysis Special Issue Conference: Globally Sustainable Banking & Finance: in support of evidence-based policy making (Belfast & Online, 2021). A synopsis of the paper was also presented at the One Planet Sovereign Wealth Fund (OPSWF) Research Forum at the Élysée Palace (Paris, 2020). The authors also wish to thank Vincent Bouchet for their valuable suggestions.
Funding Information:
Quyen Nguyen acknowledges funding from an Otago Business School Strategic Scholarship. Matthew McCarten did some of the work on this paper while at the University of Oxford. The paper has benefitted from comments received at the Department of Accountancy and Finance Seminar Series (University of Otago, 2019), the 1st CEFGroup Climate Finance Symposium (University of Otago, 2020), the 4th GRASFI-INSPIRE-NGFS Research Webinar (Online, 2021)), and the International Review of Financial Analysis Special Issue Conference: Globally Sustainable Banking & Finance: in support of evidence-based policy making (Belfast & Online, 2021). A synopsis of the paper was also presented at the One Planet Sovereign Wealth Fund (OPSWF) Research Forum at the Élysée Palace (Paris, 2020). The authors also wish to thank Vincent Bouchet for their valuable suggestions.
PY - 2023/1
Y1 - 2023/1
N2 - We examine banks' exposure to climate transition risk using a bottom-up, loan-level methodology incorporating climate stress test based on the Merton probability of default model and transition pathways from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Specifically, we match machine learning predictions of corporate carbon footprints to syndicated loans initiated in 2010–2018 and aggregate these to loan portfolios of the twenty largest banks in the United States. Banks vary in their climate transition risk not only due to their exposure to the energy sectors but also due to borrowers' carbon emission profiles from other sectors. Banks generally lend a minimal amount to coal (0.4%) but hold a considerable exposure in oil and gas (8.6%) and electricity firms (4.6%) and thus have a large exposure to the energy sectors (13.5%). We observe that climate transition risk profile was stable over time, save for a temporary (in some cases) and permanent (in others), reduction in their fossil-fuel exposure after the Paris Agreement. From the stress testing, the median loss is 0.5% of US syndicated loans, representing a decrease in CET1 capital of 4.1% when extrapolated to the whole balance sheet. The loss is twice as large in the 1.5°C scenarios (1.4%–2.1% of loan value, 12%–16% of CET1 capital) compared to the 2°C target (0.6%–1.1% of loan value, 5%–9% of CET1 capital) with significant tail-end risk (7.7% of loan value, 62% of CET1 capital). Banks' vulnerabilities are also driven by the ex-ante financial risk of their borrowers more generally, highlighting that climate risk is not independent from conventional risks.
AB - We examine banks' exposure to climate transition risk using a bottom-up, loan-level methodology incorporating climate stress test based on the Merton probability of default model and transition pathways from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Specifically, we match machine learning predictions of corporate carbon footprints to syndicated loans initiated in 2010–2018 and aggregate these to loan portfolios of the twenty largest banks in the United States. Banks vary in their climate transition risk not only due to their exposure to the energy sectors but also due to borrowers' carbon emission profiles from other sectors. Banks generally lend a minimal amount to coal (0.4%) but hold a considerable exposure in oil and gas (8.6%) and electricity firms (4.6%) and thus have a large exposure to the energy sectors (13.5%). We observe that climate transition risk profile was stable over time, save for a temporary (in some cases) and permanent (in others), reduction in their fossil-fuel exposure after the Paris Agreement. From the stress testing, the median loss is 0.5% of US syndicated loans, representing a decrease in CET1 capital of 4.1% when extrapolated to the whole balance sheet. The loss is twice as large in the 1.5°C scenarios (1.4%–2.1% of loan value, 12%–16% of CET1 capital) compared to the 2°C target (0.6%–1.1% of loan value, 5%–9% of CET1 capital) with significant tail-end risk (7.7% of loan value, 62% of CET1 capital). Banks' vulnerabilities are also driven by the ex-ante financial risk of their borrowers more generally, highlighting that climate risk is not independent from conventional risks.
KW - bank risk
KW - climate risk
KW - corporate loans
KW - stress testing
KW - syndicated loans
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144112486&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102401
DO - 10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102401
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85144112486
SN - 1057-5219
VL - 85
JO - International Review of Financial Analysis
JF - International Review of Financial Analysis
M1 - 102401
ER -