Annual Financial Report - 34 of 56

RNS Number : 6324S

HSBC Holdings PLC

18 March 2016

Appendix to Risk

Risk policies and practices

This appendix describes the significant policies and practices employed by HSBC in managing our credit risk, liquidity and funding, market risk, operational risk (including compliance risk, legal risk and fiduciary risk), insurance risk, reputational risk, pension risk and sustainability risk.

Risk governance

Our strong risk governance reflects the importance placed by the Board and the Group Risk Committee ('GRC') on shaping the Group's risk strategy and managing risks effectively. It is supported by a clear policy framework of risk ownership, a risk appetite process through which the types and levels of risk that we are prepared to accept in executing our strategy are articulated and monitored, performance scorecards cascaded from the Group Management Board ('GMB') that align business and risk objectives, and the accountability of all staff for identifying, assessing and managing risks within the scope of their assigned responsibilities. This personal accountability, reinforced by the governance structure, mandatory learning and our approach to remuneration, helps to foster a disciplined and constructive culture of risk management and control throughout HSBC.

The executive and non-executive risk governance structures and their interactions are set out in the following table. Each major operating subsidiary has established a board committee with non-executive responsibility for oversight of risk‑related matters and an executive meeting with responsibility for risk-related matters.

Governance structure for the management of risk


Board	Executive and non-executive Directors	· Approving risk appetite, strategy and performance targets for the Group · Approving appointment of chief risk officers of subsidiary companies · Encouraging a strong risk governance culture which shapes the Group's attitude to risk

Group Risk Committee ('GRC')	Independent non-executive Directors	· Advising the Board on: - risk appetite and alignment with strategy - alignment of remuneration with risk appetite (through advice to the Group Remuneration Committee) - risks associated with proposed strategic acquisitions and disposals · Overseeing high-level risk related matters · Reviewing the effectiveness of the Group's systems of risk management and internal controls (other than over financial reporting) · Overseeing the maintenance and development of a supportive culture in relation to the management of risk

Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee	Non-executive Directors, including the Chairman of the Group Remuneration Committee, and co-opted non-director members	· Overseeing controls and procedures designed to identify areas of exposure to financial crime or system abuse · Overseeing matters relating to anti-money laundering, sanctions, terrorist financing and proliferation financing · Reviewing policies and procedures to ensure continuing obligations to regulatory and law enforcement agencies are met

Conduct & Values Committee	Independent non-executive Directors	· Ensuring that in the conduct of its business, HSBC treats all stakeholders fairly · Advising the Board on HSBC policies, procedures and standards to ensure that the Group conducts business responsibly and consistently adheres to the HSBC Values



Risk Management Meeting of the GMB ('RMM')	Group Chief Risk Officer Chief Legal Officer Group Chief Executive Group Finance Director All other Group Managing Directors	· Formulating high-level global risk policy · Supporting the Group Chief Risk Officer in exercising delegated risk management authority · Overseeing implementation of risk appetite and controls · Monitoring all categories of risk and determining appropriate mitigating action · Promoting a supportive Group culture in relation to risk management and conduct · Implementing Global Standards throughout the Group

Global Risk Management Board	Group Chief Risk Officer Chief Risk Officers of HSBC's global businesses and regions Heads of Global Risk sub-functions	· Supporting the RMM and the Group Chief Risk Officer in providing strategic direction for the Global Risk function, setting priorities and overseeing their execution · Overseeing consistent approach to accountability for, and mitigation of, risk across the Global Risk function

Global Business Risk Management Committees	Global Business Chief Risk Officer Global Business Chief Executive Global Business Chief Financial Officer Heads of Global Risk sub-functions, as appropriate	· Forward looking assessment of changes in global business activities or the markets in which it operates, analysing the possible risk impact and taking appropriate action · Overseeing the implementation of global business risk appetite and controls · Monitoring all categories of risk and determining appropriate mitigating actions · Promoting a strong risk culture

Regional Risk Management Committees	Regional Chief Risk Officer Regional Chief Executive Officer Regional Chief Financial Officer Regional Global Business Chief Heads of Global Risk sub-functions, as appropriate	· Formulating regional specific risk policy · Overseeing the implementation of regional risk appetite and controls · Monitoring all categories of risk and determining appropriate mitigating actions · Promoting a strong risk culture

Subsidiary board committees responsible for risk-related matters and global business risk committees	Independent non-executive directors and/or HSBC employees with no line or functional responsibility for the activities of the relevant subsidiary or global business, as appropriate	· Providing reports to the GRC or intermediate risk committee on risk-related matters and internal controls (other than over financial reporting) of relevant subsidiaries or businesses, as requested

The governance framework also defines the required structure for Risk sub-functions, stress testing and other key areas at Group, global business, regional and country level.

Risk appetite

The Group's Qualitative Risk Appetite Statement ('RAS') formally articulates our overarching risk appetite principles, serves as a guide in embedding our risk appetite framework and supports strategic and operational decision-making across the Group.

· Strong capital position: we are to have a strong capital position defined by robust regulatory and internal capital ratios. The progression of dividends should be consistent with the growth of the Group's profitability and is predicated on the ability to meet all capital requirements in a timely manner. Both the Group and its individual legal entities must self-capitalise with capital generation, net of dividends, exceeding the capital needed to support organic growth in the entity's risk-weighted assets;

· Liquidity and funding management: operating entities are required to manage liquidity risk on a stand-alone basis with no implicit reliance on the Group or central banks and be able to withstand a Group-defined remote liquidity stress scenario. Customer assets and other illiquid assets must be funded with reliable and stable sources of funding;

· Risk return relationship: we aim to generate returns in line with the risk taken and in alignment with strategic plans, strategic business outlooks and risk management policies;

· Sustainable and diversified earnings mix: global businesses and regions must support sustainable, well diversified and non-volatile earning streams, delivering consistent returns for shareholders;

· Reputation risk: we tolerate a limited degree of reputational risk arising from business activities or associations where the risk has been escalated to the appropriate level of management. We have zero tolerance for knowingly engaging in any business, activity or association where foreseeable reputational risk/damage has not been considered and/or mitigated;

· Financial crime compliance: we will operate with integrity to the most effective financial crime risk management standards, address financial system vulnerability through a robust financial crime risk management framework, and ensure appropriate mitigating systems and controls are in place to prevent and detect financial crime. We have no appetite for deliberately or knowingly facilitating business that gives rise to illicit activity; and

· Regulatory compliance: we have no appetite for deliberately or knowingly causing detriment to consumers arising from our products and services, or incurring a breach of the letter or spirit of regulatory requirements. We have no appetite for inappropriate market conduct by a member of staff or by any Group business.

Credit risk

Credit risk management

(Audited)

The role of independent credit control unit is fulfilled by the Global Risk function. Credit approval authorities are delegated by the Board to the Chief Executive Officer of HSBC Holdings together with the authority to sub-delegate them. Similar credit approval authorities are delegated by the boards of subsidiary companies to their respective executive officers. In each major subsidiary, a Chief Risk Officer reports to the local Chief Executive Officer on credit-related issues, while maintaining a direct functional reporting line to the Group Chief Risk Officer in Global Risk. Details of the roles and responsibilities of the credit risk management function and the policies and procedures for managing credit risk are set out below. There were no significant changes in 2015.

The high-level oversight and management of credit risk provided globally by the Credit Risk sub-function in Global Risk

· to formulate Group credit policy. Compliance, subject to approved dispensations, is mandatory for all operating companies which must develop local credit policies consistent with Group policies;

· to guide operating companies on the Group's appetite for credit risk exposure to specified market sectors, activities and banking products and controlling exposures to certain higher-risk sectors;

· to undertake an independent review and objective assessment of risk. Global Risk assesses all commercial non-bank credit facilities and exposures over designated limits, prior to the facilities being committed to customers or transactions being undertaken;

· to monitor the performance and management of portfolios across the Group;

· to control exposure to sovereign entities, banks and other financial institutions, and debt securities which are not held solely for the purpose of trading;

· to set Group policy on large credit exposures, ensuring that concentrations of exposure by counterparty, sector or geography do not become excessive in relation to our capital base, and remain within internal and regulatory limits;

· to control our cross-border exposures;

· to maintain and develop our risk rating framework and systems, the governance of which is under the general oversight of the Group Model Oversight Committee ('MOC'). The Group MOC meets bi-monthly and reports to the RMM. It is chaired by the Global Risk function and its membership is drawn from Global Risk and relevant global functions or businesses;

· to report to the RMM, the GRC and the Board on high risk portfolios, risk concentrations, country limits and cross-border exposures, large impaired accounts, impairment allowances, stress testing results and recommendations and retail portfolio performance; and

· to act on behalf of HSBC Holdings as the primary interface, for credit-related issues, with the Bank of England, the PRA, local regulators, rating agencies, analysts and counterparts in major banks and non-bank financial institutions.

Principal objectives of our credit risk management

· to maintain across HSBC a strong culture of responsible lending and a robust risk policy and control framework;

· to both partner and challenge our businesses in defining, implementing and continually re-evaluating our risk appetite under actual and scenario conditions; and

· to ensure there is independent, expert scrutiny of credit risks, their costs and their mitigation.

Concentration of exposure

(Audited)

Concentrations of credit risk arise when a number of counterparties or exposures have comparable economic characteristics or such counterparties are engaged in similar activities or operate in the same geographical areas or industry sectors so that their collective ability to meet contractual obligations is uniformly affected by changes in economic, political or other conditions. We use a number of controls and measures to minimise undue concentration of exposure in our portfolios across industry, country and global business. These include portfolio and counterparty limits, approval and review controls, and stress testing.

Wrong-way risk occurs when a counterparty's exposures are adversely correlated with its credit quality. There are two types of wrong-way risk:

· general wrong-way risk occurs when the probability of counterparty default is positively correlated with general risk factors such as, for example, where the counterparty is resident and/or incorporated in a higher-risk country and seeks to sell a non-domestic currency in exchange for its home currency; and

· specific wrong-way risk occurs when the exposure to a particular counterparty is positively correlated with the probability of counterparty default, such as a reverse repo on the counterparty's own bonds. It is our policy that specific wrong-way transactions are approved on a case-by-case basis.

We use a range of tools to monitor and control wrong-way risk, including requiring the business to obtain prior approval before undertaking wrong-way risk transactions outside pre-agreed guidelines.

Credit quality of financial instruments

(Audited)

Our credit risk rating systems and processes differentiate exposures in order to highlight those with greater risk factors and higher potential severity of loss. In the case of individually significant accounts that are predominantly within our wholesale businesses, risk ratings are reviewed regularly and any amendments are implemented promptly. In our retail businesses, risk is assessed and managed using a wide range of risk and pricing models to generate portfolio data.

Our risk rating system facilitates the internal ratings-based approach under the Basel framework adopted by the Group to support calculation of our minimum credit regulatory capital requirement. Our credit quality classifications are defined below.

Special attention is paid to problem exposures in order to accelerate remedial action. When appropriate, our operating companies use specialist units to provide customers with support to help them avoid default if possible.

Group and regional Credit Review and Risk Identification teams regularly review exposures and processes in order to provide an independent, rigorous assessment of credit risk across the Group, reinforce secondary risk management controls and share best practice. Internal audit, as a third line control function, focuses on risks with a global perspective and on the design and effectiveness of primary and secondary controls, carrying out oversight audits via the sampling of global and regional control frameworks, themed audits of key or emerging risks and project audits to assess major change initiatives.

The five credit quality classifications defined below each encompass a range of granular internal credit rating grades assigned to wholesale and retail lending businesses and the external ratings attributed by external agencies to debt securities.

Credit quality classification

	Debt securities and other bills	Wholesale lending and derivatives		Retail lending
	External credit rating	Internal credit rating	12 month probability of default %	Internal credit rating¹	Expected loss %
Quality classification
Strong	A- and above	CRR²1 to CRR2	0 - 0.169	EL³1 to EL2	0 - 0.999
Good	BBB+ to BBB-	CRR3	0.170 - 0.740	EL3	1.000 - 4.999
Satisfactory	BB+ to B and unrated	CRR4 to CRR5	0.741 - 4.914	EL4 to EL5	5.000 - 19.999
Sub-standard	B- to C	CRR6 to CRR8	4.915 - 99.999	EL6 to EL8	20.000 - 99.999
Impaired	Default	CRR9 to CRR10	100	EL9 to EL10	100+ or defaulted⁴

1 We observe the disclosure convention that, in addition to those classified as EL9 to EL10, retail accounts classified EL1 to EL8 that are delinquent by
90 days or more are considered impaired, unless individually they have been assessed as not impaired (see page 127, 'Past due but not impaired gross financial instruments').

2 Customer risk rating.

3 Expected loss.

4 The EL percentage is derived through a combination of PD and LGD, and may exceed 100% in circumstances where the LGD is above 100% reflecting the cost of recoveries.

Quality classification definitions

· 'Strong' exposures demonstrate a strong capacity to meet financial commitments, with negligible or low probability of default and/or low levels of expected loss. Retail accounts operate within product parameters and only exceptionally show any period of delinquency.

· 'Good' exposures require closer monitoring and demonstrate a good capacity to meet financial commitments, with low default risk. Retail accounts typically show only short periods of delinquency, with any losses expected to be minimal following the adoption of recovery processes.

· 'Satisfactory' exposures require closer monitoring and demonstrate an average to fair capacity to meet financial commitments, with moderate default risk. Retail accounts typically show only short periods of delinquency, with any losses expected to be minor following the adoption of recovery processes.

· 'Sub-standard' exposures require varying degrees of special attention and default risk is of greater concern. Retail portfolio segments show longer delinquency periods of generally up to 90 days past due and/or expected losses are higher due to a reduced ability to mitigate these through security realisation or other recovery processes.

· 'Impaired' exposures have been assessed as impaired. These include wholesale exposures where the bank considers that either the customer is unlikely to pay its credit obligations in full, without recourse by the bank to the actions such as realising security if held, or the customer is past due more than 90 days on any material credit obligation; retail accounts include loans and advances classified as EL9 to EL10, and for those classified EL1 to EL8 they are greater than 90 days past due unless individually they have been assessed as not impaired; and renegotiated loans that have met the requirements to be disclosed as impaired and have not yet met the criteria to be returned to the unimpaired portfolio (see below).

The customer risk rating ('CRR') 10-grade scale summarises a more granular underlying 23‑grade scale of obligor probability of default ('PD'). All HSBC customers are rated using the 10- or 23-grade scale, depending on the degree of sophistication of the Basel II approach adopted for the exposure.

Each CRR band is associated with an external rating grade by reference to long-run default rates for that grade, represented by the average of issuer-weighted historical default rates. This mapping between internal and external ratings is indicative and may vary over time.

The expected loss ('EL') 10-grade scale for retail business summarises a more granular underlying EL scale for this customer segment; this combines obligor and facility/product risk factors in a composite measure.

For debt securities and certain other financial instruments, external ratings have been aligned to the five quality classifications based upon the mapping of related CRR to external credit grade.

Renegotiated loans and forbearance

(Audited)

A range of forbearance strategies is employed in order to improve the management of customer relationships, maximise collection opportunities and, if possible, avoid default, foreclosure or repossession. They include extended payment terms, a reduction in interest or principal repayments, approved external debt management plans, debt consolidations, the deferral of foreclosures and other forms of loan modifications and re-ageing.

Our policies and practices are based on criteria which enable local management to judge whether repayment is likely to continue. These typically provide a customer with terms and conditions that are more favourable than those provided initially. Loan forbearance is only granted in situations where the customer has showed a willingness to repay their loan and is expected to be able to meet the revised obligations.

Identifying renegotiated loans

The contractual terms of a loan may be modified for a number of reasons including changing market conditions, customer retention and other factors not related to the current or potential credit deterioration of a customer. When the contractual payment terms of a loan are modified because we have significant concerns about the borrower's ability to meet contractual payments when due, these loans are classified as 'renegotiated loans'.

For retail lending our credit risk management policy sets out restrictions on the number and frequency of renegotiations, the minimum period an account must have been opened before any renegotiation can be considered and the number of qualifying payments that must be received. The application of this policy varies according to the nature of the market, the product and the management of customer relationships through the occurrence of exceptional events. When considering whether there is significant concern regarding a customer's ability to meet contractual loan repayments when due, we assess the customer's delinquency status, account behaviour, repayment history, current financial situation and continued ability to repay. If the customer is not meeting contractual repayments or it is evident that they will be unable to do so without the renegotiation, there will be a significant concern regarding their ability to meet contractual payments, and the loan will be disclosed as impaired, unless the concession granted is insignificant as discussed below.

For loan restructurings in wholesale lending, indicators of significant concerns regarding a borrower's ability to pay include:

· the debtor is currently in default on any of its debt;

· the debtor has declared or is in the process of declaring bankruptcy or entering into a similar process;

· there is significant doubt as to whether the debtor will continue to be a going concern;

· currently, the debtor has securities that have been delisted, are in the process of being delisted, or are under threat of being delisted from an exchange as a result of trading or financial difficulties;

· based on estimates and projections that only encompass current business capabilities, the Group forecasts that the debtor's entity-specific cash flows will be insufficient to service the debt (both interest and principal) in accordance with the contractual terms of the existing agreement through maturity. In this instance, actual payment default may not yet have occurred; and

· absent the modification, the debtor cannot obtain funds from sources other than its existing creditors at an effective interest rate equal to the current market interest rate for similar debt for a non-distressed debtor.

Where the modification of a loan's contractual payment terms represents a concession for economic or legal reasons relating to the borrower's financial difficulty, and is a concession that we would not otherwise consider, then the renegotiated loan is disclosed as impaired in accordance with our impaired loan disclosure convention described in more detail on page 354, unless the concession is insignificant and there are no other indicators of impairment. Insignificant concessions are primarily restricted to our CML portfolio in HSBC Finance, where loans which are in the early stages of delinquency (less than 60 days delinquent) and typically have the equivalent of two payments deferred for the first time, are excluded from our impaired loan classification, as the contractual payment deferrals are deemed to be insignificant compared with payments due on the loan as a whole. For details of HSBC Finance's loan renegotiation programmes and portfolios, see pages 129 and 145.

Credit quality classification of renegotiated loans

(Audited)

Under IFRSs, an entity is required to assess whether there is objective evidence that financial assets are impaired at the end of each reporting period. A loan is impaired and an impairment allowance is recognised when there is objective evidence of a loss event that has an effect on the cash flows of the loan which can be reliably estimated. Granting a concession to a customer that we would not otherwise consider, as a result of their financial difficulty, is objective evidence of impairment and impairment losses are measured accordingly.

A renegotiated loan is presented as impaired when:

· there has been a change in contractual cash flows as a result of a concession which the lender would otherwise not consider, and

· it is probable that without the concession, the borrower would be unable to meet contractual payment obligations in full.

This presentation applies unless the concession is insignificant and there are no other indicators of impairment.

The renegotiated loan will continue to be disclosed as impaired until there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate a significant reduction in the risk of non-payment of future cash flows, and there are no other indicators of impairment. For loans that are assessed for impairment on a collective basis, the evidence typically comprises a history of payment performance against the original or revised terms, as appropriate to the circumstances. For loans that are assessed for impairment on an individual basis, all available evidence is assessed on a case-by-case basis.

For corporate and commercial loans, which are individually assessed for impairment and where non-monthly payments are more commonly agreed, the history of payment performance will depend on the underlying structure of payments agreed as part of the restructuring.

For retail lending the minimum period of payment performance required depends on the nature of loans in the portfolio, but is typically between six and twelve months. Where portfolios have more significant levels of forbearance activity, such as that undertaken by HSBC Finance, the minimum repayment performance period required may be substantially more (for further details on HSBC Finance see page 145). Payment performance periods are monitored to ensure they remain appropriate to the levels of recidivism observed within the portfolio. These performance periods are in addition to a minimum of two payments which must be received within a 60-day period (in the case of HSBC Finance, in certain circumstances, for example where debt has been restructured in bankruptcy proceedings, fewer or no qualifying payments may be required). The qualifying payments are required in order to demonstrate that the renegotiated terms are sustainable for the borrower.

Renegotiated loans are classified as unimpaired where the renegotiation has resulted from significant concern about a borrower's ability to meet their contractual payment terms but the concession is not significant and the contractual cash flows are expected to be collected in full following the renegotiation.

Derecognition of renegotiated loans

(Audited)

Loans that have been identified as renegotiated retain this designation until maturity or derecognition. When a loan is restructured as part of a forbearance strategy and the restructuring results in derecognition of the existing loan, the new loan is disclosed as renegotiated.

When determining whether a loan that is restructured should be derecognised and a new loan recognised, we consider the extent to which the changes to the original contractual terms result in the renegotiated loan, considered as a whole, being a substantially different financial instrument. The following are examples of circumstances that individually are likely to result in this test being met and derecognition accounting being applied:

· an uncollateralised loan becomes fully collateralised or vice versa;

· removal or addition of debt-to-equity conversion features attached to the loan agreement that have substance;

· a change in the currency in which the principal or interest is denominated, other than a conversion at a current market rate; or

· a change in the obligor.

The following are examples of factors that we consider may indicate that the revised loan is a substantially different financial instrument, but are unlikely to be conclusive in themselves:

· conditions added to the contract that substantially alter the credit risk of the loan (e.g. conditions on how the customer's business will be conducted in order to meet the revised terms of the loan);

· guarantees are put in place that are expected to substantially change the source of repayment and it is fully expected that the guarantees have value;

· rate structure changes (that are not existing contractual features) or debt consolidation where these changes are not purely a concession to allow the obligor to pay a monthly amount that is affordable given its credit distressed circumstances;

· a change in the liquidation preference or ranking of the instrument that is not a debt-to-equity conversion; or

· the collateral level (as a % of the loan) has doubled and the resulting coverage is more than 50%.

Renegotiated loans and recognition of impairment allowances

(Audited)

For retail lending, renegotiated loans are segregated from other parts of the loan portfolio for collective impairment assessment to reflect the higher rates of losses often encountered in these segments. When empirical evidence indicates an increased propensity to default and higher losses on such accounts, such as for re-aged loans in the US, the use of roll-rate (or discounted cash flow) methodology ensures these factors are taken into account when calculating impairment allowances by applying roll rates specifically calculated on the pool of loans subject to forbearance. When the portfolio size is small or when information is insufficient or not reliable enough to adopt a roll-rate (or discounted cash flow) methodology, a basic formulaic approach based on historical loss rate experience is used. As a result of our collective impairment methodology, we recognise collective impairment allowances on homogeneous groups of loans, including renegotiated loans, where there is historical evidence that there is a likelihood that loans in these groups will progress through the various stages of delinquency, and ultimately prove irrecoverable as a result of events occurring before the balance sheet date. This treatment applies irrespective of whether or not those loans are presented as impaired in accordance with our impaired loans disclosure convention.

In the corporate and commercial sectors, renegotiated loans are typically assessed individually. Credit risk ratings are intrinsic to the impairment assessment. A distressed restructuring is classified as an impaired loan. The individual impairment assessment takes into account the higher risk of the non-payment of future cash flows inherent in renegotiated loans.

Corporate and commercial forbearance

In the corporate and commercial sectors, forbearance activity is undertaken selectively where it has been identified that repayment difficulties against the original terms have already materialised, or are very likely to materialise. These cases are treated as impaired loans where:

· the customer is experiencing, or is very likely to experience, difficulty in meeting a payment obligation to the Group (i.e. due to current credit distress); and

· the Group is offering to the customer revised payment arrangements which constitute a concession (i.e. it is offering terms it would not normally be prepared to offer).

These cases are described as distressed restructurings. The agreement of a restructuring which meets the criteria above requires all loans, advances and counterparty exposures to the customer to be treated as impaired. Against the background of this requirement, as a customer approaches the point at which it becomes clear that there is an increasing risk that a restructuring of this kind might be necessary, the exposures will typically be regarded as sub-standard to reflect the deteriorating credit risk profile and will be graded as impaired when the restructure is proposed for approval, or sooner if there is sufficient concern regarding the customer's likeliness to pay.

For the purposes of determining whether changes to a customer's agreement should be treated as a distressed restructuring the following types of modification are regarded as concessionary:

· transfers from the customer of receivables from third parties, real estate, or other assets to satisfy fully or partially a debt;

· issuance or other granting of an equity interest to satisfy fully or partially a debt unless the equity interest is granted pursuant to existing terms for converting the debt into an equity interest; and

· modification of the terms of a debt, such as one or more of the following:

- reduction (absolute or contingent) of the stated interest rate for the remaining original life of the debt;

- extension of the maturity date or dates at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk;

- reduction (absolute or contingent) of the face amount or maturity amount of the debt; and

- reduction (absolute or contingent) of accrued interest.

Modifications that are unrelated to payment arrangements, such as the restructuring of collateral or security arrangements or the waiver of rights under covenants within documentation, are not regarded by themselves to be evidence of credit distress affecting payment capacity. Typically, covenants are in place to give the Group rights of repricing or acceleration, but they are frequently set at levels where payment capacity has yet to be affected, providing rights of action at earlier stages of credit deterioration. Such concessions do not directly affect the customer's ability to service the original contractual debt and are not reported as renegotiated loans. However, where a customer requests a non-payment related covenant waiver, the significance of the underlying breach of covenant will be considered together with any other indicators of impairment, and where there
is a degree of severity of credit distress indicating uncertainty of payment, all available evidence will be considered in determining whether a loss event has occurred. The waiver will not, however, trigger classification as a renegotiated loan
as payment terms have not been modified.

When both payment-related and non-payment related modifications are made together as a result of significant concerns regarding the payment of contractual cash flows, the loan is treated as a distressed restructuring and disclosed as a renegotiated loan.

Where clauses are built into the contract in advance which allow for payment-related modifications, and are exercised under conditions of credit distress at a point where the modification provides a concession to the customer, these cases are treated as meeting the definition of a distressed restructuring.

In assessing whether payment-related forbearance is a satisfactory and sustainable strategy, the customer's entire exposure and facilities will be reviewed and their ability to meet the terms of both the revised obligation and other credit facilities not amended in the renegotiation is assessed. Should this assessment identify that a renegotiation will not deal with a customer's payment capacity issues satisfactorily, other special management options may be applied. This process may identify the need to provide assistance to a customer specifically to restructure their business operations and activities so as to restore satisfactory payment capacity.

When considering acceptable restructuring terms we consider the ability of the customer to be able to service the revised interest payments as a necessity. When principal payment modifications are considered, again we require the customer to be able to comply with the revised terms as a necessary pre-condition for the restructuring to proceed. When principal payments are modified resulting in permanent forgiveness, or when it is otherwise considered that there is no longer a realistic prospect of recovery of outstanding principal, the affected balances are written off. When principal repayments are postponed, it is expected that the customer will be capable of paying in line with the renegotiated terms, including instances when the postponed principal repayment is expected from refinancing. In all cases, a loan renegotiation is only granted when the customer is expected to be able to meet the revised terms.

Modifications may be made on a temporary basis when time is needed for the customer to make arrangements for payment, when deterioration in payment capacity is expected to be acute but short lived, or when more time is needed to accommodate discussions regarding a more permanent accommodation with other bankers, for example in syndicated facilities where multilateral negotiation commonly features.

If a restructuring proceeds and the customer demonstrates satisfactory performance over a period of time, the case may be returned to a non-impaired grade (CRR1-8) provided no other indicators of impairment remain. Such a case cannot be returned to a non-impaired grade when a specific impairment allowance remains against any of the customer's credit facilities. The period of performance will vary depending on the underlying structure of payments to be made by the customer under the amended agreement and the extent to which the customer's financial position is considered to have improved.

Impairment assessment

(Audited)

It is our policy that each operating company in HSBC creates impairment allowances for impaired loans promptly and appropriately, when there is objective evidence that impairment of a loan or portfolio of loans has occurred.

For details of our impairment policies on loans and advances and financial investments, see Note 1j on the Financial Statements.

Impairment and credit risk mitigation

The existence of collateral has an effect when calculating impairment on individually assessed impaired loans. When we no longer expect to recover the principal and interest due on a loan in full or in accordance with the original terms and conditions, it is assessed for impairment. If exposures are secured, the current net realisable value of the collateral is taken into account when assessing the need for an impairment allowance. No impairment allowance is recognised in cases where all amounts due are expected to be settled in full on realisation of the security.

Personal lending portfolios are generally assessed for impairment on a collective basis as the portfolios typically consist of large groups of homogeneous loans. Two methods are used to calculate allowances on a collective basis: a roll-rate methodology or a more basic formulaic approach based on historical losses. On a yearly basis, we review the impairment allowance methodology used for retail banking and small business portfolios across the Group to ensure that the assumptions used in our collective assessment models continued to appropriately reflect the period of time between a loss event occurring and the account proceeding to delinquency and eventual write-off.

· The historical loss methodology is typically used to calculate collective impairment allowances for secured or low default portfolios such as mortgages until the point at which they are individually identified and assessed as impaired. For loans that are collectively assessed using historical loss methodology, the historical loss rate is derived from the average contractual write-off net of recoveries over a defined period. The net contractual write-off rate is the actual amount of loss experienced after the realisation of collateral and receipt of recoveries.

· A roll-rate methodology is more commonly adopted for unsecured portfolios when there are sufficient volumes of empirical data to develop robust statistical models. In certain circumstances mortgage portfolios have a statistically significant number of defaults and losses available, enabling reliable roll rates to be generated. In these cases a roll-rate methodology is applied until the point at which the loans are individually identified and assessed as impaired, and the average gross loss rates by delinquency bucket are adjusted to reflect the future expected cash flows after collateral and other recovery realisation.

The nature of the collective allowance assessment prevents individual collateral values or loan-to-value ('LTV') ratios from being included within the calculation. However, the loss rates used in the collective assessment are adjusted for the collateral realisation experiences which will vary depending on the LTV composition of the portfolio. For example, mortgage portfolios under a historical loss rate methodology with lower LTV ratios will typically experience lower loss history and consequently a lesser net contractual write-off rate.

For wholesale collectively assessed loans, historical loss methodologies are applied to measure loss event impairments which have been incurred but not reported. Loss rates are derived from the historical impairment charges or losses recognised on impaired loans net of recoveries over a defined period, typically no less than 60 months. These historical loss rates are adjusted by an economic factor which amends the historical averages to better represent current economic conditions affecting the portfolio. In order to reflect the likelihood of a loss event not being identified and assessed an emergence period assumption is applied which reflects the period between a loss occurring and its identification. The emergence period is estimated by management for each identified portfolio. The factors that may influence this estimation include economic and market conditions, customer behaviour, portfolio management information, credit management techniques and collection and recovery experiences in the market. The emergence period is assessed empirically on a periodic basis and may vary over time as these factors change.

Write-off of loans and advances

(Audited)

For details of our policy on the write-off of loans and advances, see Note 1j on the Financial Statements.

In HSBC Finance, the carrying amounts of residential mortgage and second lien loans in excess of net realisable value are written off at or before the time foreclosure is completed or settlement is reached with the borrower. If there is no reasonable expectation of recovery, and foreclosure is pursued, the loan is normally written off no later than the end of the month in which the loan becomes 180 days contractually past due. We regularly obtain new appraisals for these collateral dependent loans (every 180 days) and adjust carrying values to the most recent appraisal if they have improved or deteriorated as the best estimate of the cash flows that will be received on the disposal of the collateral.

Unsecured personal facilities, including credit cards, are generally written off at between 150 and 210 days past due, the standard period being the end of the month in which the account becomes 180 days contractually delinquent. Write-off periods may be extended, generally to no more than 360 days past due but, in very exceptional circumstances, to longer than that figure in a few countries where local regulation or legislation constrain earlier write‑off or where the realisation of collateral for secured real estate lending takes this time.

For secured personal facilities, final write-off should generally occur within 60 months of the default at the latest.

In the event of bankruptcy or analogous proceedings, write-off may occur earlier than at the periods stated above. Collections procedures may continue after write-off.

Impairment methodologies

(Audited)

To identify objective evidence of impairment for available-for-sale ABSs, an industry standard valuation model is normally applied which uses data with reference to the underlying asset pools and models their projected future cash flows. The estimated future cash flows of the securities are assessed at the specific financial asset level to determine whether any of them are unlikely to be recovered as a result of loss events occurring on or before the reporting date.

The principal assumptions and inputs to the models are typically the delinquency status of the underlying loans, the probability of delinquent loans progressing to default, the prepayment profiles of the underlying assets and the loss severity in the event of default. However, the models utilise other variables relevant to specific classes of collateral to forecast future defaults and recovery rates. Management uses externally available data and applies judgement when determining the appropriate assumptions in respect of these factors. We use a modelling approach which incorporates historically observed progression rates to default to determine if the decline in aggregate projected cash flows from the underlying collateral will lead to a shortfall in contractual cash flows. In such cases, the security is considered to be impaired.

In respect of collateralised debt obligations ('CDO's), expected future cash flows for the underlying collateral are assessed to determine whether there is likely to be a shortfall in the contractual cash flows of the CDO.

When a security benefits from a contract provided by a monoline insurer that insures payments of principal and interest, the expected recovery on the contract is assessed in determining the total expected credit support available to the ABS.

Loan management unit

The HSBC Loan Management Unit ('LMU') is a front line customer contact department within Wholesale Credit and Market Risk that assumes responsibility for managing business customer relationships requiring intensive and close control where the bank's lending is at risk. LMU operates on a regional basis across the Group and is independent of the originating business management units. It reports locally to the Regional Head of Wholesale Credit and Market Risk. Customers are identified and transferred to LMU by business management or the Wholesale Credit and Market Risk approval teams.

Customers managed by LMU are normally operating outside the Group's risk appetite. They typically show symptoms of significant financial difficulty, the management team displays limited experience of managing a business in distress and the management and financial information provided to the Group is insufficient and unreliable.

The levels of customer exposure under management and the size of the LMU team varies between countries depending on the breadth of business undertaken locally but LMU will always manage highly distressed situations where individual customer exposure exceeds $1.5m.

The primary focus of LMU is to protect the bank's capital and minimise losses by working consensually with customers to promote and support viable recovery strategies wherever achievable, with the ultimate intention of returning the customer to front line relationship management. In some cases, rehabilitation is not possible and LMU will consider a range of options to protect the bank's exposure and solvency of the customer. On occasion, it is not possible to find a satisfactory solution and the customer may file for insolvency or local equivalent. In all outcomes, LMU seeks to treat customers fairly, sympathetically and positively, in a professional way with transparent processes and procedures.

Remediation and restructuring strategies available in the business and LMU include granting a customer various types of concessions while seeking to enhance the ability of the customer to ultimately repay the Group which could include enhancing the overall security available to the Group. Any decision to approve a concession will be a function of the regions specific country and sector appetite, the key metrics of the customer, the market environment, the loan structure and security. Internal reviews on customers managed directly by LMU are performed on a scheduled basis in accordance with relevant accounting guidelines, credit policies and national banking regulations. Under certain circumstances, concessions granted may result in the loan being classified as a renegotiated loan.

Collateral and other credit enhancements held

(Audited)

Loans and advances held at amortised cost

The Group's practice is to lend on the basis of customers' ability to meet their obligations out of cash flow resources rather than rely on the value of security offered. Depending on a customer's standing and the type of product, facilities may be provided without security. For other lending, a charge over collateral is obtained and considered in determining the credit decision and pricing. In the event of default, the bank may utilise the collateral as a source of repayment. Depending on its form, collateral can have a significant financial effect in mitigating our exposure to credit risk.

Additionally, risk may be managed by employing other types of collateral and credit risk enhancements such as second charges, other liens and unsupported guarantees, but the valuation of such mitigants is less certain and their financial effect has not been quantified.

Refinance risk

Many types of lending require the repayment of a significant proportion of the principal at maturity. Typically, the mechanism of repayment for the customer is through the acquisition of a new loan to settle the existing debt. Refinance risk arises where a customer is unable to repay such term debt on maturity, or to refinance debt at commercial rates. When there is evidence that this risk may apply to a specific contract, HSBC may need to refinance the loan on concessionary terms that we would not otherwise have considered, in order to recoup the maximum possible cash flows from the contract and potentially avoid the customer defaulting on the repayment of principal. When there is sufficient evidence that borrowers, based on their current financial capabilities, may fail at maturity to repay or refinance their loans, these loans are disclosed as impaired with recognition of a corresponding impairment allowance where appropriate.

Nature of HSBC's securitisation and other structured exposures

Mortgage-backed securities ('MBS's) are securities that represent interests in groups of mortgages and provide investors with the right to receive cash from future mortgage payments (interest and/or principal). An MBS which references mortgages with different risk profiles is classified according to the highest risk class.

Collateralised debt obligations ('CDO's) are securities backed by a pool of bonds, loans or other assets such as asset-backed securities ('ABS's). CDOs may include exposure to sub-prime or Alt-A mortgage assets where these are part of the underlying assets or reference assets. As there is often uncertainty surrounding the precise nature of the underlying collateral supporting CDOs, all CDOs supported by residential mortgage-related assets are classified as sub-prime. Our holdings of ABSs and CDOs and direct lending positions, and the categories of mortgage collateral and lending activity, are described below.

Our exposure to non-residential mortgage-related ABSs includes securities with collateral relating to commercial property mortgages, leveraged finance loans, student loans, and other assets such as securities with other receivable-related collateral.

Definitions and classifications of ABSs and CDOs



Sub-prime	Loans to customers who have limited credit histories, modest incomes or high debt-to-income ratios or have experienced credit problems caused by occasional delinquencies, prior charge-offs, bankruptcy or other credit-related actions.	For US mortgages, a FICO score of 620 or less has primarily been used to determine whether a loan is sub-prime. For non-US mortgages, management judgement is used.

US Home Equity Lines of Credit ('HELoC's) (categorised within 'Sub-prime')	A form of revolving credit facility provided to customers, which is supported in the majority of circumstances by a second lien or lower ranking charge over residential property.	Holdings of HELoCs are classified as sub-prime.

US Alt-A	Lower risk loans than sub-prime, but they share higher risk characteristics than lending under fully conforming standard criteria.	US credit scores and the completeness of documentation held (such as proof of income), are considered when determining whether an Alt-A classification is appropriate. Non sub-prime mortgages in the US are classified as Alt-A if they are not eligible for sale to the major US Government mortgage agencies or sponsored entities.

US Government agency and sponsored enterprises mortgage-related assets	Securities that are guaranteed by US Government agencies such as the Government National Mortgage Association ('Ginnie Mae'), or by US Government sponsored entities including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.	Holdings of US Government agency and US Government sponsored enterprises' mortgage-related assets are classified as prime exposures.



UK non-conforming mortgages (categorised within 'Sub-prime')	UK mortgages that do not meet normal lending criteria. Examples include mortgages where the expected level of documentation is not provided (such as income with self-certification), or where poor credit history increases risk and results in pricing at a higher than normal lending rate.	UK non-conforming mortgages are treated as sub-prime exposures.

Other residential mortgages	Residential mortgages, including prime mortgages, that do not meet any of the classifications described above.	Prime residential mortgage-related assets are included in this category.

Liquidity and funding

The management of liquidity and funding is primarily undertaken locally (by country) in our operating entities in compliance with the Group's Liquidity and Funding Risk Management Framework (the 'LFRF'), and with practices and limits set by the GMB through the RMM and approved by the Board. These limits vary according to the depth and the liquidity of the markets in which the entities operate. Our general policy is that each defined operating entity should be self-sufficient in funding its own activities. Where transactions exist between operating entities, they are reflected symmetrically in both entities.

As part of our Asset, Liability and Capital Management ('ALCM') structure, we have established ALCOs at Group level, in the regions and in operating entities. The terms of reference of all ALCOs include the monitoring and control of liquidity and funding.

The primary responsibility for managing liquidity and funding within the Group's framework and risk appetite resides with the local operating entities' ALCOs. Our most significant operating entities are overseen by regional ALCOs, Group ALCO and the RMM. The remaining smaller operating entities are overseen by regional ALCOs, with appropriate escalation of significant issues to Group ALCO and the RMM.

Operating entities are predominately defined on a country basis to reflect our local management of liquidity and funding. Typically, an operating entity will be defined as a single legal entity. However, to take account of the situation where operations in a country are booked across multiple subsidiaries or branches:

· an operating entity may be defined as a wider sub-consolidated group of legal entities if they are incorporated in the same country, liquidity and funding are freely fungible between the entities and permitted by local regulation, and the definition reflects how liquidity and funding are managed locally; or

· an operating entity may be defined more narrowly as a principal office (branch) of a wider legal entity operating in multiple countries, reflecting the local country management of liquidity and funding.

The RMM reviews and agrees annually the list of entities it directly oversees and the composition of these entities.

Primary sources of funding

Customer deposits in the form of current accounts and savings deposits payable on demand or at short notice form a significant part of our funding, and we place considerable importance on maintaining their stability. For deposits, stability depends upon maintaining depositor confidence in our capital strength and liquidity, and on competitive and transparent pricing.

We also access wholesale funding markets by issuing senior secured and unsecured debt securities (publically and privately) and borrowing from the secured repo markets against high quality collateral, in order to obtain funding for non-banking subsidiaries that do not accept deposits, to align asset and liability maturities and currencies and to maintain a presence in local wholesale markets.

The management of liquidity and funding risk

Inherent liquidity risk categorisation

We place our operating entities into one of two categories (low and medium) to reflect our assessment of their inherent liquidity risk considering political, economic and regulatory factors within the host country and factors specific to the operating entities themselves, such as their local market, market share and balance sheet strength. The categorisation involves management judgement and is based on the perceived liquidity risk of an operating entity relative to other entities in the Group. The categorisation is intended to reflect the possible impact of a liquidity event, not the probability of an event, and forms part of our risk appetite. It is used to determine the prescribed stress scenario that we require our operating entities to be able to withstand and manage to.

Core deposits

A key element of our internal framework is the classification of customer deposits into core and non-core based on our expectation of their behaviour during periods of liquidity stress. This characterisation takes into account the inherent liquidity risk categorisation of the operating entity originating the deposit, the nature of the customer and the size and pricing of the deposit. No deposit is considered to be core in its entirety unless it is contractually collateralising a loan. The core deposit base in each operating entity is considered to be a long-term source of funding and therefore is assumed not to be withdrawn in the liquidity stress scenario that we use to calculate our principal liquidity risk metrics.

The three filters considered in assessing whether a deposit in any operating entity is core are:

· price: any deposit priced significantly above market or benchmark rates is generally treated as entirely non-core;

· size: depositors with total funds above certain monetary thresholds are excluded. Thresholds are established by considering the business line and inherent liquidity risk categorisation; and

· line of business: the element of any deposit remaining after the application of the price and size filters is assessed on the basis of the line of business with which the deposit is associated. The proportion of any customer deposit that can be considered core under this filter is between 35% and 90%.

Repo transactions and bank deposits cannot be classified as core deposits.

Advances to core funding ratio

Core customer deposits are an important source of funding to finance lending to customers, and mitigate against reliance on short-term wholesale funding. Limits are placed on operating entities to restrict their ability to increase loans and advances to customers without corresponding growth in core customer deposits or long-term debt funding with a residual maturity beyond one year; this measure is referred to as the 'advances to core funding' ratio.

Advances to core funding ratio limits are set by the RMM for the most significant operating entities, and by regional ALCOs for smaller operating entities, and are monitored by ALCM teams. The ratio describes loans and advances to customers as a percentage of the total of core customer deposits and term funding with a remaining term to maturity in excess of one year. In general, customer loans are assumed to be renewed and are included in the numerator of the ratio, irrespective of the contractual maturity date. Reverse repo arrangements are excluded from the advances to core funding ratio.

Stressed coverage ratios

Stressed coverage ratios are derived from stressed cash flow scenario analyses and express stressed cash inflows as a percentage of stressed cash outflows over one-month and three-month time horizons.

The stressed cash inflows include:

· inflows (net of assumed haircuts) expected to be generated from the realisation of liquid assets; and

· contractual cash inflows from maturing assets that are not already reflected as a utilisation of liquid assets.

In line with the approach adopted for the advances to core funding ratio, customer loans are generally assumed not to generate any cash inflows under stress scenarios and are therefore excluded from the numerator of the stressed coverage ratio, irrespective of the contractual maturity date.

A stressed coverage ratio of 100% or higher reflects a positive cumulative cash flow under the stress scenario being monitored. Group operating entities are required to maintain a ratio of 100% or more out to three months under the combined market-wide and HSBC-specific stress scenario defined by the inherent liquidity risk categorisation of the operating entity concerned.

Compliance with operating entity limits is monitored by ALCM teams and reported monthly to the RMM for the main operating entities and to regional ALCOs for the smaller operating entities.

Stressed scenario analysis

We use a number of standard Group stress scenarios designed to model:

· combined market-wide and HSBC-specific liquidity crisis scenarios; and

· market-wide liquidity crisis scenario.

These scenarios are modelled by all operating entities. The appropriateness of the assumptions for each scenario is reviewed by ALCM regularly and formally approved by the RMM and the Board annually as part of the liquidity and funding risk appetite approval process.

Stressed cash outflows are determined by applying a standard set of prescribed stress assumptions to the Group's cash flow model. Our framework prescribes the use of two market-wide scenarios and two further combined market-wide and HSBC-specific stress scenarios of increasing severity. In addition to our standard stress scenarios, individual operating entities are required to design their own scenarios to reflect specific local market conditions, products and funding bases.

The two combined market-wide and HSBC-specific scenarios model a more severe scenario than the market-wide scenario. The relevant combined market-wide and HSBC-specific stress scenario that an operating entity manages to is based upon its inherent liquidity risk categorisation. The key assumptions factored into the two combined market-wide and HSBC-specific stress scenarios are summarised as follows:

· all non-core deposits are deemed to be withdrawn within three months (80% within one month), with the level of non-core deposits dependent on the operating entity's inherent liquidity risk categorisation;

· the ability to access interbank funding and unsecured term debt markets ceases for the duration of the scenario;

· the ability to generate funds from illiquid asset portfolios (securitisation and secured borrowing) is restricted to 25-75% of the lower of issues in the last six months or expected issues in the next six months. The restriction is based on current market conditions and is dependent on the operating entity's inherent liquidity risk categorisation;

· the ability to access repo funding ceases for any asset not classified as liquid under our liquid asset policy for the duration of the scenario;

· drawdowns on committed lending facilities must be consistent with the severity of the market stress being modelled and dependent on the inherent liquidity risk categorisation of the operating entity;

· outflows are triggered by a defined downgrade in long-term ratings. We maintain an ongoing assessment of the appropriate number of notches to reflect;

· customer loans are assumed to be renewed at contractual maturity;

· interbank loans and reverse repos are assumed to run off contractually; and

· assets defined as liquid assets are assumed to be realised in cash ahead of their contractual maturity, after applying a defined stressed haircut of up to 20%.

Liquid assets of HSBC's principal operating entities

Stressed scenario analysis and the numerator of the coverage ratio include the assumed cash inflows that would be generated from the realisation of liquid assets, after applying the appropriate stressed haircut. These assumptions are made on the basis of management's expectation of when an asset is deemed to be realisable.

Liquid assets are unencumbered assets that meet the Group's definition of liquid assets and are either held outright or as a consequence of a reverse repo transaction with a residual contractual maturity beyond the time horizon of the stressed coverage ratio being monitored. Any unencumbered asset held as a result of reverse repo transactions with a contractual maturity within the time horizon of the stressed coverage ratio being monitored is excluded from the stock of liquid assets and is instead reflected as a contractual cash inflow.

Our framework defines the asset classes that can be assessed locally as high quality and realisable within one month and between one month and three months. Each local ALCO has to be satisfied that any asset which may be treated as liquid in accordance with the Group's liquid asset policy will remain liquid under the stress scenario being managed to.

Inflows from the utilisation of liquid assets within one month can generally only be based on confirmed withdrawable central bank deposits or the sale or repo of government and quasi-government exposures generally restricted to those denominated in the sovereign's domestic currency. High quality ABSs (predominantly US MBSs) and covered bonds are also included but inflows assumed for these assets are capped.

Inflows after one month are also reflected for high quality non-financial and non-structured corporate bonds and equities within the most liquid indices.


Level 1	Within one month	· Central government · Central bank (including confirmed withdrawable reserves) · Supranationals · Multilateral development banks · Coins and banknotes
Level 2	Within one month but capped	· Local and regional government · Public sector entities · Secured covered bonds and pass-through ABSs · Gold
Level 3	From one to three months	· Unsecured non-financial entity securities · Equities listed on recognised exchanges and within liquid indices

Any entity owned and controlled by central or local/regional government but not explicitly guaranteed is treated as a public sector entity.

Any exposure explicitly guaranteed is reflected as an exposure to the ultimate guarantor.

In terms of the criteria used to ensure liquid assets are of a high quality, the Group's liquid asset policy sets out the following additional criteria:

1. Central bank and central government exposures:

· denominated in the domestic currency of the related sovereign and held:

- onshore in the domestic banking system, qualify as Level 1 liquid assets.

- offshore, must be risk weighted 20% or lower under the Basel standardised risk weighting methodology to qualify as Level 1 liquid assets.

· denominated in a currency other than the currency of the related sovereign (i.e. foreign currency) must be risk weighted 20% or lower under the Basel standardised risk weighting methodology and issued in a limited number of major currencies to qualify as Level 1 liquid assets.

The treatment of eurozone countries using the euro as their domestic currency depends on whether the exposures are held onshore in the domestic banking system or offshore. Central bank and central government exposures held onshore in the domestic banking system qualify as Level 1 liquid assets under criteria 1, but central bank and central government exposures held offshore are considered to be denominated in a foreign currency under criteria 3.

2. Local/regional government exposures held onshore and considered by the local regulator to be the same risk as central government exposures can be considered central government exposures.

3. Supranationals and multilateral development banks must be 0% risk weighted under the Basel standardised risk-weighting methodology to qualify as Level 1 liquid assets.

4. To qualify as a level 2 liquid asset, the exposure must be risk weighted 20% or lower under the Basel standardised risk-weighting methodology.

5. To qualify as a Level 3 liquid asset, an unsecured non-financial corporate debt exposure must satisfy a minimum internal rating requirement.

On a case-by-case basis, operating entities are permitted to treat other assets as liquid if these assets are realistically assessed to be liquid under stress. These liquid assets are reported as 'Other', separately from Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 liquid assets.

Net cash flow arising from interbank and intragroup loans and deposits

Under the LFRF, a net cash inflow within three months arising from interbank and intra-Group loans and deposits will give rise to a lower liquid asset requirement. Conversely, a net cash outflow within three months arising from interbank and intra-Group loans and deposits will give rise to a higher liquid assets requirement.

Net cash flow arising from reverse repo, repo, stock borrowing, stock lending and outright short positions (including
intra-Group)

A net cash inflow represents liquid resources in addition to liquid assets because any unencumbered asset held as a consequence of a reverse repo transaction with a residual contractual maturity within the stressed coverage ratio time period is not reflected as a liquid asset.

The impact of net cash outflow depends on whether the underlying collateral encumbered as a result will qualify as a liquid asset when released at the maturity of the repo. The majority of the Group's repo transactions are collateralised by liquid assets and, as such, any net cash outflow shown is offset by the return of liquid assets, which are excluded from the liquid asset table above.

Wholesale debt monitoring

Where wholesale debt term markets are accessed to raise funding, ALCO is required to establish cumulative rolling three-month and 12-month debt maturity limits to ensure no concentration of maturities within these timeframes.

Liquidity behaviouralisation

Liquidity behaviouralisation is applied to reflect our assessment of the expected period for which we are confident that we will have access to our liabilities, even under a severe liquidity stress scenario, and the expected period for which we must assume that we will need to fund our assets. Behaviouralisation is applied when the contractual terms do not reflect the expected behaviour. Liquidity behaviouralisation is reviewed and approved by local ALCO in compliance with policies set by the RMM. Our approach to liquidity risk management will often mean different approaches are applied to assets and liabilities. For example, management may assume a shorter life for liabilities and a longer-term funding requirement for assets. All core deposits are assumed under the Group's core/non-core and advances to core funding frameworks to have a liquidity behaviouralised life beyond one year and to represent a homogeneous source of core funding. The behaviouralisation of assets is far more granular and seeks to differentiate the period for which we must assume that we will need to fund the asset.

Funds transfer pricing

Our funds transfer pricing policies give rise to a two-stage funds transfer pricing approach, reflecting the fact that we separately manage interest rate risk and liquidity and funding risk under different assumptions. They have been developed to be consistent with our risk management frameworks. Each operating entity is required to apply the Group's transfer pricing policy framework to determine for each material currency the most appropriate interest rate risk transfer pricing curve, a liquidity premium curve (which is the spread over the interest rate risk transfer pricing curve) and a liquidity recharge assessment (which is the spread under or over the interest rate risk transfer pricing curve).

The interest rate risk transfer pricing policy seeks to ensure that all market interest rate risk arising structurally from non-trading (banking book) assets and liabilities which is capable of being neutralised externally in the market or neutralised internally by off-setting transfers, is transferred to BSM to be managed centrally as non-trading market risk. For each material currency each operating entity employs a single interest rate risk transfer pricing curve. The transfer price curve used for this purpose reflects how BSM in each operating entity is best able to neutralise the interest rate risk in the market at the point of transfer. Where basis risk can be identified between the re-pricing basis of an external asset or external liability and the re-pricing basis of the interest rate risk transfer pricing curve, this basis risk may be transferred to BSM provided it can neutralise the basis risk in the market.

Liquidity and funding risk is transfer priced independently from interest rate risk because the liquidity and funding risk of an operating entity is transferred to ALCO to be managed centrally. ALCO monitors and manages the advances to core funding ratio and delegates the management of the liquid asset portfolio and execution of the wholesale term debt funding plan to BSM. This assists ALCO in ensuring the Group's stressed coverage ratios remain above 100% out to three months.

The liquidity and funding risk transfer price consists of two components:

· Liquidity recharge: the cost of holding the benchmark liquid asset (the yield under the transfer price) to meet stressed cash outflows. The benchmark liquid asset is decided by ALCO and based on the weighted average duration that can be achieved by investing in level 1 liquid assets, with a residual duration of up to one year.

· Liquidity premium: the assessed cost/value of term funding (the yield over the transfer price) to pay for term debt and core deposits.

The assessed cost of holding liquid assets is allocated to the outflows modelled by the Group's internal stressed coverage ratio framework.

Liquidity premium is charged to any asset that affects our three-month stressed coverage ratios based on the assessed behaviouralised liquidity life of the asset, with any asset affecting the Group's advances to core funding metric required to have a minimum behaviouralised life of at least one year, and the prevailing liquidity premium curve rate set by ALCO and calibrated in line with Group's calibration principles. Core deposits therefore share equally in the liquidity premiums charged to the assets they support, after deducting the cost of any term funding.

Repos and stock lending

GB&M provides collateralised security financing services to its clients, providing them with cash financing or specific securities. When cash is provided to clients against collateral in the form of securities, the cash provided is recognised on the balance sheet as a reverse repo. When securities are provided to clients against cash collateral the cash received is recognised on the balance sheet as a repo or, if the securities are equity securities, as stock lending.

Each operating entity manages its collateral through a central collateral pool, in line with the LFRF. When specific securities need to be delivered and the entity does not have them currently available within the central collateral pool, the securities are borrowed on a collateralised basis. When securities are borrowed against cash collateral the cash provided is recognised on the balance sheet as a reverse repo or, if the securities are equity securities, as stock borrowing.

Operating entities may also borrow cash against collateral in the form of securities, using the securities available in the central collateral pool. Repos and stock lending can be used in this way to fund the cash requirement arising from securities owned outright by Markets to facilitate client business, and the net cash requirement arising from financing client securities activity.

Reverse repos, stock borrowing, repos and stock lending are reported net when the IFRSs offsetting criteria are met. In some cases transactions to borrow or lend securities are collateralised using securities. These transactions are off-balance sheet.

Any security accepted as collateral for a reverse repo or stock borrowing transaction must be of very high quality and its value subject to an appropriate haircut. Securities borrowed under reverse repo or stock borrowing transactions can only be recognised as part of the liquidity asset buffer for the duration of the transactions and only if the security received is eligible under the liquid asset policy within the LFRF.

Credit controls are in place to ensure that the fair value of any collateral received remains appropriate to collateralise the cash or fair value of securities given.

The effect of active collateral management

Collateral is managed on an operating entity basis, consistent with the approach adopted in managing liquidity and funding. Available collateral held by each operating entity is managed as a single collateral pool. In deciding which collateral to pledge, each operating entity seeks to optimise the use of the available collateral pool within the confines of the LFRF, irrespective of whether the collateral pledged is recognised on-balance sheet or was received in respect of reverse repo, stock borrowing or derivative transactions.

Managing collateral in this manner affects the presentation of asset encumbrance in that we may encumber on-balance sheet holdings while maintaining available unencumbered off-balance sheet holdings, even though we are not seeking to directly finance the on-balance sheet holdings pledged.

In quantifying the level of encumbrance of negotiable securities, the encumbrance is analysed by individual security. When a particular security is encumbered and we hold the security both on-balance sheet and off-balance sheet with the right to repledge, we assume for the purpose of this disclosure that the off-balance sheet holding received from the third party is encumbered ahead of the on-balance sheet holding.

An on-balance sheet encumbered and off-balance sheet unencumbered asset will occur, for example, if we receive a specific security as a result of a reverse repo/stock borrowing transaction, but finance the cash lent by pledging a generic collateral basket, even if the security received is eligible for the collateral basket pledged. It will also occur if we receive a generic collateral basket as a result of a reverse repo transaction but finance the cash lent by pledging specific securities, even if the securities pledged are eligible for the collateral basket.

Encumbered and unencumbered assets

Definitions of the categories included in the table 'Analysis of on-balance sheet encumbered and unencumbered assets':

· Assets encumbered as a result of transactions with counterparties other than central banks as a result of covered bonds are any assets on our balance sheet pledged against our covered bonds issuance with a counterparty which is not central bank and as a result the assets are unavailable to the bank to secure funding, satisfy collateral needs or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements.

· Assets encumbered as a result of transactions with counterparties other than central banks as a result of securitisation are any assets on our balance sheet pledged against securitisations with a counterparty which is not central bank including asset-backed commercial paper, CDOs, residential mortgage-backed securities, or structured investment vehicles paper and as a result the assets are unavailable to the bank to secure funding, satisfy collateral needs or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements.

· Assets encumbered as a result of transactions with counterparties other than central banks - Other are assets on our balance sheet (other than covered bonds and securitisation above) which have been pledged with a counterparty which is not central bank as a collateral against an existing liability, and as a result are assets which are unavailable to the bank to secure funding, satisfy collateral needs or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements. Examples include assets pledged for sale and repurchase and stock lending transactions and certain property assets.

· Assets positioned at central banks (i.e. pre-positioned plus encumbered) are any assets that are eligible for emergency central bank liquidity/funding or under central bank pre-existing arrangements for funding without further due diligence work required. Any transferable customer loan that is central bank eligible such as pre-positioned central bank UK mortgages and US mortgages accepted by FHLB and assets on our balance sheet which have been pledged with central bank as collateral against an existing liability, and as a result are assets which are unavailable to the bank to secure funding, satisfy collateral needs or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements.

· Unencumbered - readily available assets are assets regarded by the bank to be readily available in the normal course of business to secure funding, meet collateral needs, or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements, and are not subject to any restrictions on their use for these purposes.

· Unencumbered - other assets capable of being encumbered are assets where there are no restrictions on their use to secure funding, meet collateral needs, or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements, but they are not readily realisable in the normal course of business in their current form.

· Unencumbered - reverse repo/stock borrowing receivables and derivative assets are assets related specifically to reverse repo, stock borrowing and derivative transactions. They are shown separately as these on-balance sheet assets cannot be pledged but often give rise to the receipt of non-cash assets which are not recognised on the balance sheet, and can additionally be used to raise secured funding, meet additional collateral requirements or be sold.

· Unencumbered - cannot be encumbered are assets that have not been pledged and which we have assessed could not be pledged and therefore could not be used to secure funding, meet collateral needs, or be sold to reduce potential future funding requirements. An example is assets held by the Group's insurance subsidiaries that back liabilities to policyholders and support the solvency of these entities.

Historically, the Group has not recognised any contingent liquidity value for assets other than those assets defined under the LFRF as being liquid assets, and any other negotiable instruments that under stress are assumed to be realisable after three months, even though they may currently be realisable. This approach has generally been driven by our risk appetite not to place any reliance on central banks. In a few cases, we have recognised the contingent value of discrete pools of assets, but the amounts involved are insignificant. As a result, we have reported the majority of our loans and advances to customers and banks in the category 'Other realisable assets' as management would need to perform additional actions in order to make the assets transferable and readily realisable.

Additional information

The amount of assets pledged to secure liabilities reported in Note 18 on the Financial Statements may be greater than the book value of assets reported as being encumbered in the table on page 163. Examples of where such differences occur are:

· ABSs and covered bonds, where the amount of liabilities issued plus the required mandatory over-collateralisation is lower than the book value of assets pledged to the pool. Any difference is categorised in the table above as 'Unencumbered - readily realisable assets';

· negotiable securities held by custodians or settlement agents, where a floating charge has been given over the entire holding to secure intra-day settlement liabilities, are only reported as encumbered to the extent that we have a liability to the custodian or settlement agent at the reporting date, with the balance reported as 'Unencumbered - readily realisable assets'; and

· assets pre-positioned with central banks or government agencies are only reported as encumbered to the extent that we have secured funding with the collateral. The unutilised pre‑positioned collateral is reported as 'Unencumbered - readily realisable assets'.

Securities reflected on the balance sheet that are pledged as collateral against an existing liability or lent are reflected as encumbered for the duration of the transaction. When securities are received as collateral or borrowed, and when we have the right to sell or re-pledge these securities, they are reflected as available and unencumbered for the duration of the transaction, unless re-pledged or sold. Further analysis regarding the encumbrance of securities resulting from repos and stock lending and available unencumbered assets arising from reverse repos and stock borrowing is provided under the heading 'Encumbered and unencumbered assets' on page 162.

In the normal course of business we do not seek to utilise repo financing as a source of funding to finance customer assets, beyond the collateralised security financing activities within Markets described above.

The original contractual maturity of reverse repo, stock borrowing, repo and stock lending is short term with the vast majority of transactions being for less than 90 days.

Management of cross-currency liquidity and funding risk

Our liquidity and funding risk framework also considers the ability of each entity to continue to access foreign exchange markets under stress when a surplus in one currency is used to meet a deficit in another currency, for example, by the use of the foreign currency swap markets. Where appropriate, operating entities are required to monitor stressed coverage ratios and advances to core funding ratios for non-local currencies.

HSBC Holdings

HSBC Holdings' primary sources of cash are dividends received from subsidiaries, interest on and repayment of intra-group loans and securities with interest earned on its own liquid funds. HSBC Holdings also raises ancillary funds in the debt capital markets through subordinated and senior debt issuance. Cash is primarily used for the provision of capital and TLAC funding to subsidiaries, interest payments to debt holders and dividend payments to shareholders.

HSBC Holdings is also subject to contingent liquidity risk by virtue of credit-related commitments and guarantees and similar contracts issued. Such commitments and guarantees are only issued after due consideration of HSBC Holdings' ability to finance the commitments and guarantees and the likelihood of the need arising.

HSBC Holdings actively manages the cash flows from its subsidiaries to optimise the amount of cash held at the holding company level. The ability of subsidiaries to pay dividends or advance monies to HSBC Holdings depends on, among other things, their respective local regulatory capital and banking requirements, exchange controls, statutory reserves, and financial and operating performance. During 2015, none of the Group's subsidiaries experienced significant restrictions on paying dividends or repaying loans and advances. Also, there are no foreseen restrictions envisaged by our subsidiaries on paying dividends or repaying loans and advances, with the exception of HSBC North America Holdings Inc. None of the subsidiaries which are excluded from our regulatory consolidation has capital resources below its minimum regulatory requirement.

Market risk

Market risk is the risk that movements in market factors, such as foreign exchange rates, interest rates, credit spreads, equity prices and commodity prices, will reduce our income or the value of our portfolios.

Market risk in global businesses

The diagram below summarises the main business areas where trading and non-trading market risks reside and the market risk measures used to monitor and limit exposures.

1 The interest rate risk on the fixed-rate securities issued by HSBC Holdings is not included in the Group VaR. The management of this risk is described on page 171.

Where appropriate, we apply similar risk management policies and measurement techniques to both trading and non-trading portfolios. Our objective is to manage and control market risk exposures in order to optimise return on risk while maintaining a market profile consistent with our status as one of the world's largest banking and financial services organisations.

The nature of the hedging and risk mitigation strategies performed across the Group corresponds to the market risk management instruments available within each operating jurisdiction. These strategies range from the use of traditional market instruments, such as interest rate swaps, to more sophisticated hedging strategies to address a combination of risk factors arising at portfolio level.

Market risk governance

(Audited)

Market risk is managed and controlled through limits approved by the RMM for HSBC Holdings and our various global businesses. These limits are allocated across business lines and to the Group's legal entities.

The management of market risk is principally undertaken in GB&M, where 94% of the total value at risk of HSBC (excluding insurance) and almost all trading VaR resides, using risk limits approved by the GMB. VaR limits are set for portfolios, products and risk types, with market liquidity being a primary factor in determining the level of limits set.

Global Risk is responsible for setting market risk management policies and measurement techniques. Each major operating entity has an independent market risk management and control sub-function which is responsible for measuring market risk exposures in accordance with the policies defined by Global Risk, and monitoring and reporting these exposures against the prescribed limits on a daily basis. The market risk limits are governed according to the framework illustrated to the left.

Each operating entity is required to assess the market risks arising on each product in its business and to transfer them to either its local GB&M unit for management, or to separate books managed under the supervision of the local ALCO.

Our aim is to ensure that all market risks are consolidated within operations that have the necessary skills, tools, management and governance to manage them. In certain cases where the market risks cannot be fully transferred, we identify the effect of varying scenarios on valuations or on net interest income resulting from any residual risk positions. Further details on the control and management process for residual risks are provided on page 212.

Model risk is governed through Model Oversight Committees ('MOC's) at the regional and global Wholesale Credit and Market Risk levels. They have direct oversight and approval responsibility for all traded risk models utilised for risk measurement and management and stress testing. The MOCs prioritise the development of models, methodologies and practices used for traded risk management within the Group and ensure that they remain within our risk appetite and business plans. The Markets
MOC reports into the Group MOC, which oversees all model risk types at Group level. Group MOC informs the RMM about material issues at least on a bi-annual basis. The RMM is the Group's 'Designated Committee' according to regulatory rules and has delegated day-to-day governance of all traded risk models to the Markets MOC.

Our control of market risk in the trading and non-trading portfolios is based on a policy of restricting individual operations to trading within a list of permissible instruments authorised for each site by Global Risk, of enforcing new product approval procedures, and of restricting trading in the more complex derivative products only to offices with appropriate levels of product expertise and robust control systems.

Market risk measures

Monitoring and limiting market risk exposures

Our objective is to manage and control market risk exposures while maintaining a market profile consistent with our risk appetite.

We use a range of tools to monitor and limit market risk exposures including sensitivity analysis, value at risk and stress testing.

Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis measures the impact of individual market factor movements on specific instruments or portfolios, including interest rates, foreign exchange rates and equity prices, such as the effect of a one basis point change in yield. We use sensitivity measures to monitor the market risk positions within each risk type. Sensitivity limits are set for portfolios, products and risk types, with the depth of the market being one of the principal factors in determining the level of limits set.

Value at risk

(Audited)

Value at risk ('VaR') is a technique that estimates the potential losses on risk positions as a result of movements in market rates and prices over a specified time horizon and to a given level of confidence. The use of VaR is integrated into market risk management and is calculated for all trading positions regardless of how we capitalise those exposures. Where there is not an approved internal model, we use the appropriate local rules to capitalise exposures.

In addition, we calculate VaR for non-trading portfolios to have a complete picture of risk. Our models are predominantly based on historical simulation. VaR is calculated at a 99% confidence level for a one-day holding period. Where we do not calculate VaR explicitly, we use alternative tools as summarised in the Market Risk Stress Testing table on page 213.

Our VaR models derive plausible future scenarios from past series of recorded market rates and prices, taking into account inter-relationships between different markets and rates such as interest rates and foreign exchange rates. The models also incorporate the effect of option features on the underlying exposures.

The historical simulation models used incorporate the following features:

· historical market rates and prices are calculated with reference to foreign exchange rates and commodity prices, interest rates, equity prices and the associated volatilities;

· potential market movements utilised for VaR are calculated with reference to data from the past two years; and

· VaR measures are calculated to a 99% confidence level and use a one-day holding period.

The nature of the VaR models means that an increase in observed market volatility will lead to an increase in VaR without any changes in the underlying positions.

We are committed to the ongoing development of our in-house risk models.

VaR model limitations

Although a valuable guide to risk, VaR should always be viewed in the context of its limitations. For example:

· the use of historical data as a proxy for estimating future events may not encompass all potential events, particularly those which are extreme in nature;

· the use of a holding period assumes that all positions can be liquidated or the risks offset during that period. This may not fully reflect the market risk arising at times of severe illiquidity, when the holding period may be insufficient to liquidate or hedge all positions fully;

· the use of a 99% confidence level, by definition, does not take into account losses that might occur beyond this level of confidence;

· VaR is calculated on the basis of exposures outstanding at the close of business and therefore does not necessarily reflect intra-day exposures; and

· VaR is unlikely to reflect loss potential on exposures that only arise under conditions of significant market movement.

Risk not in VaR framework

Our VaR model is designed to capture significant basis risks such as CDS versus bond, asset swap spreads and cross-currency basis. Other basis risks which are not completely covered in VaR, such as the Libor tenor basis, are complemented by our risk not in VaR ('RNIV') calculations, and are integrated into our capital framework.

The RNIV framework therefore aims to capture and capitalise material market risks that are not adequately covered in the VaR model. An example of this is Libor-overnight index swap basis risk for minor currencies. In such instances the RNIV framework uses stress tests to quantify the capital requirement. On average in 2015, the capital requirement derived from these stress tests represented 2.3% of the total internal model-based market risk requirement.

Risks covered by RNIV represented 19% of market risk RWAs for models with regulatory approval and included those resulting from underlying risk factors which are not observable on a daily basis across asset classes and products, such as dividend risk and implied correlation risks.

Risk factors are reviewed on a regular basis and either incorporated directly in the VaR models, where possible, or quantified through the VaR-based RNIV approach or a stress test approach within the RNIV framework. The severity of the scenarios is calibrated to be in line with the capital adequacy requirements. The outcome of the VaR-based RNIV is included in the VaR calculation and back-testing; a stressed VaR RNIV is also computed for the risk factors considered in the VaR-based RNIV approach.

Level 3 assets

The fair values of Level 3 assets and liabilities in trading portfolios are disclosed on page 382, and represent only a small proportion of the overall trading portfolio. Market risk arising from Level 3 instruments is managed by various market risk techniques such as stress testing and notional limits. The table on page 384 shows the movement in Level 3 financial instruments.

Stress testing

Stress testing is an important procedure that is integrated into our market risk management tool to evaluate the potential impact on portfolio values of more extreme, although plausible, events or movements in a set of financial variables. In such scenarios, losses can be much greater than those predicted by VaR modelling.

Stress testing is implemented at legal entity, regional and overall Group levels. A standard set of scenarios is utilised consistently across all regions within the Group. Scenarios are tailored to capture the relevant events or market movements at each level. The risk appetite around potential stress losses for the Group is set and monitored against referral limits.

Market risk reverse stress tests are undertaken on the premise that there is a fixed loss. The stress testing process identifies which scenarios lead to this loss. The rationale behind the reverse stress test is to understand scenarios which are beyond normal business settings that could have contagion and systemic implications.

Stressed VaR and stress testing, together with reverse stress testing and the management of gap risk, provide management with insights regarding the 'tail risk' beyond VaR for which HSBC's appetite is limited.

Trading portfolios

Volcker Rule

In 2013, US regulators finalised the Volcker Rule. Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and its final implementing rules (collectively referred to as the 'Volcker Rule') imposes broad restrictions on HSBC's ability to engage in 'proprietary trading' or to own, sponsor, or have certain relationships with hedge funds, private equity funds, and certain other collective investment vehicles (broadly defined as 'covered funds'). These restrictions are subject to a number of exemptions or exclusions, including market making, underwriting and risk-mitigating hedging, organising covered funds for customers and issuers of asset-backed securities, and underwriting or market making in covered fund interests.

The Volcker Rule broadly went into effect on 22 July 2015, with the exception of certain legacy fund activities that are able to rely on an extension of the conformance date.

HSBC has implemented a programme to comply with the Volcker Rule, including policies and procedures, internal controls, corporate governance, independent testing, training, and record keeping and, eventually, calculation and reporting of quantitative metrics for certain trading activities.

HSBC has completed training for all affected front office and control personnel, has conformance plans for those covered funds to which the extension applies, and believes that it is compliant in all material respects with the Volcker Rule.

Back-testing

We routinely validate the accuracy of our VaR models by back-testing them against both actual, which replaced clean profit and loss from 1 August 2015, and hypothetical profit and loss against the corresponding VaR numbers. Hypothetical profit and loss excludes non-modelled items such as fees, commissions and revenues of intra-day transactions.

We would expect on average to see two or three profits and two or three losses in excess of VaR at the 99% confidence level over a one-year period. The actual number of profits or losses in excess of VaR over this period can therefore be used to gauge how well the models are performing.

We back-test our Group VaR at various levels which reflect a full legal entity scope of HSBC, including entities that do not have local permission to use VaR for regulatory purposes.

Gap risk

Certain products, such as non-recourse margin loans, are not exposed to small day-to-day moves in market rates or prices, but are exposed large discontinuous moves. Such movements may occur, for example, when, in reaction to an adverse event or unexpected news announcement, some parts of the market move far beyond their normal volatility range and become temporarily illiquid. Products which exhibit exposure only to large discontinuous moves (gap risk) are not well captured by VaR measures or traditional market risk sensitivity measures. HSBC has implemented additional stress measurement and controls over such products.

In 2015, gap risk exposure was primarily due to non-recourse loan transactions, mostly for corporate clients, where the collateral against the loan is limited to the posted assets. Upon occurrence of a gap event, the value of the collateral could fall below the outstanding loan amount.

We did not incur any notable gap loss in 2015.

De-peg risk

For certain currencies (pegged or managed) the spot exchange rate is pegged at a fixed-rate (typically to US dollars or euros), or managed within a predefined band around a pegged rate. De-peg risk is the risk of the peg or managed band changing or being abolished, and moving to a floating regime.

HSBC has extensive experience in managing fixed and managed currency regimes. Using stressed scenarios on spot rates, we are able to analyse how de-peg events would affect the positions held by HSBC. We monitor such scenarios to pegged or managed currencies, such as the Hong Kong dollar, renminbi and Middle Eastern currencies, and limit any potential losses that would occur. This historical VaR measures, which may not fully capture the risk involved in holding positions in pegged or managed currencies, as such currencies may not have experienced a de-peg event during the historical timeframe being considered.

ABS/MBS exposures

The ABS/MBS (asset and mortgage-backed securities) exposures within the trading portfolios are managed within sensitivity and VaR limits as described on page 167, and are included within the stress testing scenarios described above.

Non-trading portfolios

(Audited)

Most of the Group's non-trading VaR relates to Balance Sheet Management ('BSM') or local treasury management functions. Contributions to Group non-trading VaR are driven by interest rates and credit spread risks arising from all global businesses. There is no commodity market risk in the non-trading portfolios.

Non-trading VaR also includes the interest rate risk of non-trading financial instruments held by the global businesses and transferred into portfolios managed by BSM or local treasuries. In measuring, monitoring and managing risk in our non-trading portfolios, VaR is just one of the tools used. The management of interest rate risk in the banking book is described further in 'Non-trading interest rate risk' below, including the role of BSM.

Non-trading VaR excludes equity risk on available-for-sale securities, structural foreign exchange risk, and interest rate risk on fixed-rate securities issued by HSBC Holdings, the scope and management of which are described in the relevant sections below.

Our control of market risk in the non-trading portfolios is based on transferring the assessed market risk of non-trading assets and liabilities created outside BSM or Markets, to the books managed by BSM, provided the market risk can be neutralised. The net exposure is typically managed by BSM through the use of fixed-rate government bonds (liquid assets held in available-for-sale books) and interest rate swaps. The interest rate risk arising from fixed-rate government bonds held within available-for-sale portfolios is reflected within the Group's non-traded VaR. Interest rate swaps used by BSM are typically classified as either a fair value hedge or a cash flow hedge and are included within the Group's non-traded VaR. Any market risk that cannot be neutralised in the market is managed by local ALCOs in segregated ALCO books.

Equity securities classified as available for sale

Potential new commitments are subject to risk appraisal to ensure that industry and geographical concentrations remain within acceptable levels for the portfolio. Regular reviews are performed to substantiate the valuation of the investments within the portfolio and investments held to facilitate ongoing business, such as holdings in government-sponsored enterprises and local stock exchanges.

Structural foreign exchange exposures

Structural foreign exchange exposures represent net investments in subsidiaries, branches and associates, the functional currencies of which are currencies other than the US dollar. An entity's functional currency is that of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates.

Exchange differences on structural exposures are recognised in 'Other comprehensive income'. We use the US dollar as our presentation currency in our consolidated financial statements because the US dollar and currencies linked to it form the major currency bloc in which we transact and fund our business. Our consolidated balance sheet is, therefore, affected by exchange differences between the US dollar and all the non-US dollar functional currencies of underlying subsidiaries.

We hedge structural foreign exchange exposures only in limited circumstances. Our structural foreign exchange exposures are managed with the primary objective of ensuring, where practical, that our consolidated capital ratios and the capital ratios
of individual banking subsidiaries are largely protected from the effect of changes in exchange rates. This is usually achieved
by ensuring that, for each subsidiary bank, the ratio of structural exposures in a given currency to RWAs denominated in that currency is broadly equal to the capital ratio of the subsidiary in question.

We may also transact hedges where a currency in which we have structural exposures is considered likely to revalue adversely, and it is possible in practice to transact a hedge. Any hedging is undertaken using forward foreign exchange contracts which are accounted for under IFRSs as hedges of a net investment in a foreign operation, or by financing with borrowings in the same currencies as the functional currencies involved. We evaluate residual structural foreign exchange exposures using an expected shortfall method.

Non-trading interest rate risk

Non-trading book interest rate risk arises principally from mismatches between the future yield on assets and their funding cost, as a result of interest rate changes. Analysis of this risk is complicated by making assumptions on embedded optionality within certain product areas such as the incidence of mortgage prepayments, and from behavioural assumptions regarding the economic duration of liabilities which are contractually repayable on demand such as current accounts, and the re-pricing behaviour of managed rate products. These assumptions around behavioural features are captured in our interest rate risk behaviouralisation framework, which is described below.

We aim, through our management of market risk in non-trading portfolios, to mitigate the effect of prospective interest rate movements which could reduce future net interest income, while balancing the cost of such hedging activities on the current net revenue stream.

Our funds transfer pricing policies give rise to a two stage funds transfer pricing approach. For details see page 207.

Interest rate risk behaviouralisation

Unlike liquidity risk, which is assessed on the basis of a very severe stress scenario, non-trading interest rate risk is assessed and managed according to 'business-as-usual' conditions. In many cases the contractual profile of non-trading assets/liabilities arising from assets/liabilities created outside Markets or BSM does not reflect the behaviour observed.

Behaviouralisation is therefore used to assess the market interest rate risk of non-trading assets/liabilities and this assessed market risk is transferred to BSM, in accordance with the rules governing the transfer of interest rate risk from the global businesses to BSM.

Behaviouralisation is applied in three key areas:

· the assessed re-pricing frequency of managed rate balances;

· the assessed duration of non-interest bearing balances, typically capital and current accounts; and

· the base case expected prepayment behaviour or pipeline take-up rate for fixed-rate balances with embedded optionality.

Interest rate behaviouralisation policies have to be formulated in line with the Group's behaviouralisation policies and approved at least annually by local ALCOs and regional ALCMs, in conjunction with local, regional and Group market risk monitoring teams.

The extent to which balances can be behaviouralised is driven by:

· the amount of the current balance that can be assessed as 'stable' under business-as-usual conditions; and

· for managed rate balances, the historical market interest rate re-pricing behaviour observed; or

· for non-interest bearing balances, the duration for which the balance is expected to remain under business-as-usual conditions. This assessment is often driven by the re-investment tenors available to BSM to neutralise the risk through the use of fixed-rate government bonds or interest rate derivatives, and for derivatives the availability of cash flow hedging capacity.

Balance Sheet Management

Effective governance across BSM is supported by the dual reporting lines it has to the CEO of GB&M and to the Group Treasurer. In each operating entity, BSM is responsible for managing liquidity and funding under the supervision of the local ALCO (which usually meets on a monthly basis). It also manages the non-trading interest rate positions transferred to it within a Markets limit structure.

In executing the management of the liquidity risk on behalf of ALCO, and managing the non-trading interest rate positions transferred to it, BSM invests in highly-rated liquid assets in line with the Group's liquid asset policy. The majority of the liquidity is invested in central bank deposits and government, supranational and agency securities with most of the remainder held in short-term interbank and central bank loans.

Withdrawable central bank deposits are accounted for as cash balances. Interbank loans, statutory central bank reserves and loans to central banks are accounted for as loans and advances to banks. BSM's holdings of securities are accounted for as available-for-sale or, to a lesser extent, held-to-maturity assets.

Statutory central bank reserves are not recognised as liquid assets. The statutory reserves that would be released in line with the Group's stressed customer deposit outflow assumptions are reflected as stressed inflows.

BSM is permitted to use derivatives as part of its mandate to manage interest rate risk. Derivative activity is predominantly through the use of vanilla interest rate swaps which are part of cash flow hedging and fair value hedging relationships.

Credit risk in BSM is predominantly limited to short-term bank exposure created by interbank lending, exposure to central banks and high quality sovereigns, supranationals or agencies which constitute the majority of BSM's liquidity portfolio. BSM does not manage the structural credit risk of any Group entity balance sheets.

BSM is permitted to enter into single name and index credit derivatives activity, but it does so to manage credit risk on the exposure specific to its securities portfolio in limited circumstances only. The risk limits are extremely limited and closely monitored. At 31 December 2015, BSM had no open credit derivative index risk.

VaR is calculated on both trading and non-trading positions held in BSM. It is calculated by applying the same methodology used for the Markets business and utilised as a tool for market risk control purposes.

BSM holds trading portfolio instruments in only very limited circumstances. Positions and the associated VaR were not significant during 2015.

Sensitivity of net interest income

A principal part of our management of market risk in non-trading portfolios is to monitor the sensitivity of expected net interest income under varying interest rate scenarios (simulation modelling). This monitoring is undertaken at an entity level by local ALCOs.

Entities apply a combination of scenarios and assumptions relevant to their local businesses, and standard scenarios which are required throughout HSBC. The latter are consolidated to illustrate the combined pro forma effect on our consolidated net interest income.

Projected net interest income sensitivity figures represent the effect of the pro forma movements in net interest income based on the projected yield curve scenarios and the Group's current interest rate risk profile. This effect, however, does not incorporate actions which would probably be taken by BSM or in the business units to mitigate the effect of interest rate risk. In reality, BSM seeks proactively to change the interest rate risk profile to minimise losses and optimise net revenues. The net interest income sensitivity calculations assume that interest rates of all maturities move by the same amount in the 'up-shock' scenario. Rates are not assumed to become negative in the 'down-shock' scenario which may, in certain currencies, effectively result in non-parallel shock. In addition, the net interest income sensitivity calculations take account of the effect on net interest income of anticipated differences in changes between interbank interest rates and interest rates over which the entity has discretion in terms of the timing and extent of rate changes.

Defined benefit pension schemes

Market risk arises within our defined benefit pension schemes to the extent that the obligations of the schemes are not fully matched by assets with determinable cash flows. See 'Pension risk' on page 225 for additional information.

HSBC Holdings

As a financial services holding company, HSBC Holdings has limited market risk activity. Its activities predominantly involve maintaining sufficient capital resources to support the Group's diverse activities; allocating these capital resources across our businesses; earning dividend and interest income on its investments in our businesses; providing dividend payments to its equity shareholders and interest payments to providers of debt capital; and maintaining a supply of short-term capital resources for deployment under extraordinary circumstances. It does not take proprietary trading positions.

The main market risks to which HSBC Holdings is exposed are non-trading interest rate risk and foreign currency risk. Exposure to these risks arises from short-term cash balances, funding positions held, loans to subsidiaries, investments in long-term financial assets and financial liabilities including debt capital issued. The objective of HSBC Holdings' market risk management strategy is to reduce exposure to these risks and minimise volatility in capital resources, cash flows and distributable reserves. Market risk for HSBC Holdings is monitored by HSBC Holdings ALCO in accordance with its risk appetite statement.

HSBC Holdings uses interest rate swaps and cross currency interest rate swaps to manage the interest rate risk and foreign currency risk arising from its long-term debt issues.

Operational risk

The objective of our operational risk management is to manage and control operational risk in a cost effective manner within targeted levels of operational risk consistent with our risk appetite, as defined by the GMB.

Operational risk is organised as a specific risk discipline within Global Risk, and a formal governance structure provides oversight over its management. The Global Operational Risk sub-function supports the Group Chief Risk Officer and the Global Operational Risk Committee. It is responsible for establishing and maintaining the Operational Risk Management Framework ('ORMF') and monitoring the level of operational losses and the effectiveness of the control environment. It is also responsible for operational risk reporting at Group level, including the preparation of reports for consideration by the RMM and the Group Risk Committee. The Global Operational Risk Committee meets at least quarterly to discuss key risk issues and review the effective implementation of the ORMF.

The ORMF defines minimum standards and processes and the governance structure for the management of operational risk and internal control in our geographical regions, global businesses and global functions. The ORMF has been codified in a high level standards manual supplemented with detailed policies which describes our approach to identifying, assessing, monitoring and controlling operational risk and gives guidance on mitigating action to be taken when weaknesses are identified.

Business managers throughout the Group are responsible for maintaining an acceptable level of internal control commensurate with the scale and nature of operations, and for identifying and assessing risks, designing controls and monitoring the effectiveness of these controls. The ORMF helps managers to fulfil these responsibilities by defining a standard risk assessment methodology and providing a tool for the systematic reporting of operational loss data.

A centralised database is used to record the results of the operational risk management process. Operational risk and control self-assessments are input and maintained by business units. Business and functional management and business risk and control managers monitor the progress of documented action plans to address shortcomings. To ensure that operational risk losses are consistently reported and monitored at Group level, all Group companies are required to report individual losses when the net loss is expected to exceed $10,000, and to aggregate all other operational risk losses under $10,000. Losses are entered into the Group Operational Risk database and are reported to the RMM on a monthly basis.

For further details, see the Pillar 3 Disclosures 2015 report.

Compliance risk

Compliance risk falls within the definition of operational risk. All Group companies are required to observe the letter and spirit of all relevant laws, codes, rules, regulations and standards of good market practice. These rules, regulations, Group policies and formal standards include those relating to AML, counter-terrorist and proliferation financing, sanctions compliance, anti-bribery and corruption, conduct of business and other regulations.

The two Compliance sub-functions: Financial Crime Compliance ('FCC') and Regulatory Compliance ('RC'), are appropriately supported by a shared Compliance Operating Office and Reputational Risk Management teams. The Global Head of Financial Crime Compliance and the Global Head of Regulatory Compliance both report to the Group Chief Risk Officer.

There are compliance teams in each of the countries where we operate and in all global businesses. These compliance teams are principally overseen by Heads of Financial Crime Compliance and Regulatory Compliance located in Europe, the US, Canada, Latin America, Asia and the Middle East and North Africa. The effectiveness of the regional and global business compliance teams are reviewed by the respective FCC and RC Assurance teams.

Global policies and procedures require the prompt identification and escalation to Financial Crime Compliance or Regulatory Compliance of all actual or suspected breaches of any law, rule, regulation, policy or other relevant requirement. Reportable events are reported to the relevant Risk Management Committees and those of Group significance are escalated to the RMM, the Group Risk Committee and the Board, as appropriate. They are disclosed in the Annual Report and Accounts and Interim Report, as appropriate.

We published a new Global Conduct Policy in 2015 (following the approval and implementation of the global conduct approach and framework in 2014) for the management of conduct designed to ensure that we meet our strategic commitment to deliver fair outcomes for our customers, and not to disrupt the orderly and transparent operation of financial markets. It defines responsibilities and ensures that business activity and decisions are underpinned by a robust consideration and management of associated risks supporting delivery of the required fair outcomes for customers and maintenance of market integrity. Our focus on compliance and conduct issues is further reinforced by the Financial System Vulnerabilities Committee, which reports to the Board on matters relating to financial crime and financial system abuse and provides a forward-looking perspective on financial crime risk. In addition, the Conduct & Values Committee reports to the Board on matters relating to delivery of the required global conduct outcomes for customers and the orderly and transparent operation of financial markets, together with adherence to HSBC's Values.

Legal risk

Each legal department is required to have processes and procedures in place to manage legal risk that conform to Group standards.

Legal risk falls within the definition of operational risk and includes:

· contractual risk, which is the risk of a member of HSBC suffering financial loss, legal or regulatory action or reputational damage because its rights and/or obligations under a contract to which it is a party are technically defective;

· dispute adjudication risk, which is the risk of a member of HSBC suffering financial loss or reputational damage due to an adverse dispute environment or a failure to take appropriate steps to defend, prosecute and/or resolve actual or threatened legal claims brought against or by a Group member, including for the avoidance of doubt, regulatory matters;

· legislative risk, which is the risk that a Group member fails to or is unable to identify, analyse, track, assess or correctly interpret applicable legislation, case law or regulation, or new regulatory, legislative or doctrinal interpretations of existing laws or regulations, or decisions in the Courts or regulatory bodies; and

· non-contractual rights risk, which is the risk that a Group member's assets are not properly owned or protected or are infringed by others, or a Group member infringes another party's rights.

There are legal departments in 47 of the countries in which we operate. In addition to the Group Legal function, there are regional legal sub-functions in each of Europe, North America, Latin America, the Middle East and North Africa and Asia headed by Regional General Counsels, and a Global General Counsel responsible for each of the global businesses.

Global security and fraud risk

Security and fraud risk issues are managed at Group level by Global Security and Fraud Risk. This unit, which has responsibility for information, fraud, contingency, financial intelligence, physical and geopolitical risks is fully integrated within the central Global Risk function. This enables management to identify and mitigate the permutations of these and other non-financial risks to its business lines across the jurisdictions in which we operate.

· The Information Security Risk sub-function is responsible for defining the strategy and policy by which the organisation protects its information assets and services from compromise, corruption or loss, whether caused deliberately or inadvertently by internal or external parties. It provides independent advice, guidance and oversight to the business about the effectiveness of information security controls and practices in place or being proposed.

· The Fraud Risk sub-function is responsible for ensuring that effective prevention, detection and investigation measures are in place against all forms of fraudulent activity, whether initiated internally or externally, and is available to support any part of the business. To achieve that and to attain the level of integration needed to face the threat, the management of all types of fraud (e.g. card fraud, non-card fraud and internal fraud, including investigations) is established within one management structure and is part of the Global Risk function. We use technology extensively to prevent and detect fraud. For example, customers' credit and debit card spending is monitored continuously and suspicious transactions are highlighted for verification, internet banking sessions are reviewed and transactions monitored in a similar way and all new account applications are screened for fraud. We have a fraud systems strategy which is designed to provide minimum standards and allow easier sharing of best practices to detect fraud and minimise false alerts. We have developed a holistic and effective anti-fraud strategy which, in addition to the use of advanced technology, includes fraud prevention policies and practices, the implementation of strong internal controls, investigations response teams and liaison with law enforcement where appropriate.

· The Contingency Risk sub-function is responsible for ensuring that the group's critical systems, processes and functions have the resilience to maintain continuity in the face of major disruptive events. Within this wider risk, business continuity management covers the pre-planning for recovery, seeking to minimise the adverse effects of major business disruption, either globally, regionally or within country, against a range of actual or emerging risks. The pre-planning concentrates on the protection of customer services, our staff, revenue generation, the integrity of data and documents and meeting regulatory requirements. Each business has its own recovery plan, which is developed following the completion of a business impact analysis. This determines how much time the business could sustain an outage before the level of losses becomes unacceptable, i.e. its criticality. These plans are reviewed and tested every year. The planning is undertaken against Group policy and standards and each business confirms in an annual compliance certificate that all have been met. Should there be exceptions, these are raised and their short-term resolution is overseen by Group and regional business continuity teams. It is important that plans are dynamic and meet all risks, particularly those of an emerging nature such as possible pandemics and cyber attacks. The ORMF is used to measure our resilience to these risks, and is confirmed to Group and regional risk committees. Resilience is managed through various risk mitigation measures. These include agreeing with IT acceptable recovery times of systems, ensuring our critical buildings have the correct infrastructure to enable ongoing operations, requiring critical vendors to have their own recovery plans and arranging with Group Insurance appropriate cover for business interruption costs.

· The Financial Intelligence Unit is jointly administered by Security and Fraud Risk and Financial Crime Compliance. It uses advanced analytics and subject matter expertise to detect indicators of financial crime in the Group's clients and counter-parties.

· The Physical Security sub-function develops practical physical, electronic and operational counter-measures to ensure that the people, property and assets managed by the Group are protected from crime, theft, attack and groups hostile to HSBC's interests.

· The Geopolitical Risk Unit provides both regular and ad hoc reporting to business executives and senior security and fraud risk management on geopolitical risk profiles and evolving threats in countries in which the Group operates. This both enhances strategic business planning and provides an early view into developing security risks. Security travel controls and guidance are also maintained.

Systems risk

Systems risk is the risk of failure or malfunction in the automated platforms that support the Group's daily execution (application systems) and the systems infrastructure on which they reside (data centres, networks and distributed computers).

The management of systems risk is overseen globally by the HSBC Operations, Services and Technology ('HOST') organisation. Oversight is provided through monthly risk management committee meetings that provide a comprehensive overview of existing and emerging top risks.

HOST manages the control environment over systems risks using risk and control assessments and scenario analysis. Material risks are monitored through the periodic testing of associated key controls.

Business-critical services have been identified. Quantitative scorecards called risk appetite statements are used for monitoring performance, and have been established for each of these services.

Global availability monitoring (24x7) is in place to assist in determining systems health. Our incident management processes are linked to business and geographical major incident groups for recovery decision-making and communication to customers and regulators.

Vendor risk management

Our vendor risk management ('VRM') programme is a global framework for managing risk with third party vendors, especially where we are reliant on outsourced agreements to provide critical services to our customers. VRM contains a rigorous process to identify material contracts and their key risks and ensure controls are in place to manage and mitigate these risks. Global and regional governance structures have been implemented to oversee vendor third party service providers.

Risk management of insurance operations

Overview of insurance products

(Audited)

HSBC manufactures the following main classes of contract:

· life insurance contracts with discretionary participation features ('DPF');

· credit life insurance business;

· annuities;

· term assurance and critical illness policies;

· linked life insurance;

· investment contracts with DPF;

· unit-linked investment contracts; and

· other investment contracts (including pension contracts written in Hong Kong).

We additionally write a small amount of non-life insurance business primarily covering personal and commercial property.

Nature and extent of risks

(Audited)

The majority of the risks in our Insurance business derive from manufacturing activities and can be categorised between financial risks and insurance risk; financial risks include market risk, credit risk and liquidity risk. Operational and sustainability risks are also present and are covered by the Group's respective overall risk management processes.

The following sections describe how financial risks and insurance risk are managed.

HSBC subsidiaries that manufacture insurance products establish control procedures complying with the guidelines and requirements issued by Group Insurance and local regulatory requirements. Country level oversight is exercised by local insurance risk management committees. Country Chief Risk Officers ('CRO's) have reporting lines locally and functional reporting lines into the Group Insurance CRO, who has overall accountability for risk management in insurance operations globally. The Group Insurance Risk Management Committee oversees the control framework globally and is accountable to the RBWM Risk Management Committee on risk matters.

In addition, local ALCOs monitor and review the duration and cash flow matching of insurance assets and liabilities.

All insurance products, whether manufactured internally or by a third party, are subjected to a product approval process prior to introduction.

Financial risks

(Audited)

Our insurance businesses are exposed to a range of financial risks, including market risk, credit risk and liquidity risk. Market risk includes interest rate, equity and foreign exchange risks. The nature and management of these risks is described below.

Manufacturing subsidiaries are exposed to financial risks when, for example, the proceeds from financial assets are not sufficient to fund the obligations arising from insurance and investment contracts. In many jurisdictions, local regulatory requirements prescribe the type, quality and concentration of assets that these subsidiaries must maintain to meet insurance liabilities. These requirements complement Group-wide policies.

Market risk

(Audited)

Market risk is managed through limits approved by the RMM for HSBC Holdings. An allocation of the Group-wide market risk appetite is provided to the Insurance business by Group Traded Risk. These limits are then apportioned between different Insurance entities to support the strategic aims of the business.

The market risk team supporting insurance within Wholesale Market Risk and the Group Insurance CRO are responsible for setting market risk management policies and measurement techniques applied to the Insurance activities of HSBC.

At entity level the appetite for market risk is expressed through detailed market risk mandates. Investment Officers hold day-to-day responsibility for managing assets so as to remain within the mandates and are answerable to the local ALCOs. ALCOs hold wider responsibility over longer-term actions related to liabilities that are necessary to remain within the agreed mandates.

ALCOs act to implement the strategy of the Executive Committee which, in turn, is answerable to the Board. The Board holds ultimate accountability over the risk profile held and targeted within each company.

Description of market risk

The main features and exposures of products manufactured by our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries which generate market risk, and the market risk to which these features expose the Group, are discussed below.

Interest rate risk arises from a mismatch between asset yields and the investment returns implied by the guarantees payable to policyholders by insurance manufacturing subsidiaries. When asset yields are below guaranteed yields, products may be closed to new business, repriced or restructured. A list of the different types of guarantees within our insurance contracts is outlined below.

Categories of guaranteed benefits

· implicit interest rate guarantees: when future policyholder benefits are defined as fixed monetary amounts, e.g. annuities in payment and endowment savings contracts;

· annual return: the annual return is guaranteed to be no lower than a specified rate. This may be the return credited to the policyholder every year, or the average annual return credited to the policyholder over the life of the policy, which may occur on the maturity date or the surrender date of the contract; and

· capital: policyholders are guaranteed to receive no less than the premiums paid plus declared bonuses less expenses.

The proceeds from insurance and investment products with DPF are primarily invested in bonds with a proportion allocated to other asset classes in order to provide customers with the potential for enhanced returns. Subsidiaries with portfolios of such products are exposed to the risk of falls in market prices which cannot be fully reflected in the discretionary bonuses. An increase in market volatility could also result in an increase in the value of the guarantee to the policyholder.

Long-term insurance and investment products typically permit the policyholder to surrender the policy or let it lapse at any time. When the surrender value is not linked to the value realised from the sale of the associated supporting assets, the subsidiary is exposed to market risk. In particular, when customers seek to surrender their policies when asset values are falling, assets may have to be sold at a loss to fund redemptions.

A subsidiary holding a portfolio of long-term insurance and investment products, especially with DPF, may attempt to reduce exposure to its local market by investing in assets in countries other than that in which it is based. These assets may be denominated in currencies other than the subsidiary's local currency. Where the foreign exchange exposure associated with these assets is not hedged, for example because it is not cost effective to do so, this exposes the subsidiary to the risk of its local currency strengthening against the currency of the related assets.

For unit-linked contracts, market risk is substantially borne by the policyholder, but market risk exposure typically remains as fees earned for management are related to the market value of the linked assets.

Asset and liability matching

It is not always possible to match asset and liability durations, partly because there is uncertainty over policyholder behaviour which introduces uncertainty over the receipt of all future premiums and the timing of claims, and partly because the forecast payment dates of liabilities may exceed the duration of the longest dated investments available.

We use models to assess the effect of a range of future scenarios on the values of financial assets and associated liabilities, and ALCOs employ the outcomes in determining how to best structure asset holdings to support liabilities. The scenarios include stresses applied to factors which affect insurance risk such as mortality and lapse rates. Of particular importance is assessing the expected pattern of cash inflows against the benefits payable on the underlying contracts, which can extend for many years.

How market risk is managed

All our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries have market risk mandates which specify the investment instruments in which they are permitted to invest and the maximum quantum of market risk which they may retain. They manage market risk by using some or all of the techniques listed below, depending on the nature of the contracts they write.

Techniques for managing market risk

· for products with DPF, adjusting bonus rates to manage the liabilities to policyholders. The effect is that a significant portion of the market risk is borne by the policyholder;

· structuring asset portfolios to support projected liability cash flows;

· using derivatives to protect against adverse market movements or better match liability cash flows;

· for new products with investment guarantees, considering the cost when determining the level of premiums or the price structure;

· periodically reviewing products identified as higher risk, which contain investment guarantees and embedded optionality features linked to savings and investment products;

· designing new products to mitigate market risk, such as changing the investment return sharing portion between policyholders and the shareholder;

· exiting, to the extent possible, investment portfolios whose risk is considered unacceptable; and

· repricing premiums charged to policyholders.

In the product approval process, the risks embedded in new products are identified and assessed. When, for example, options and guarantees are embedded in new products, the due diligence process ensures that complete and appropriate risk management procedures are in place. Management reviews certain exposures more frequently when markets are more volatile to ensure that any matters arising are dealt with in a timely fashion.

How the exposure to market risk is measured

Our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries monitor exposures against mandated limits regularly and report them to Group Insurance.

In addition, large insurance manufacturing subsidiaries perform a high-level monthly assessment of market risk exposure against risk appetite. This is submitted to Group Insurance and a global assessment presented to the RBWM Risk Management Committee. Risk measures include statistics relating to IFRSs, regulatory solvency and economic capital.

Standard measures for quantifying market risks

· for interest rate risk, the sensitivities of the net present values of asset and expected liability cash flows, in total and by currency, to a one basis point parallel shift in the discount curves used to calculate the net present values;

· for equity price risk, the total market value of equity holdings and the market value of equity holdings by region and country; and

· for foreign exchange risk, the total net short foreign exchange position and the net foreign exchange positions by currency.

The standard measures are relatively straightforward to calculate and aggregate, but they have limitations. The most significant one is that a parallel shift in yield curves of one basis point does not capture the non-linear relationships between the values of certain assets and liabilities and interest rates. Non-linearity arises, for example, from investment guarantees and product features which enable policyholders to surrender their policies. We bear the shortfall if the yields on investments held to support contracts with guaranteed benefits are less than the investment returns implied by the guaranteed benefits.

We recognise these limitations and augment our standard measures with stress tests which examine the effect of a range of market rate scenarios on the aggregate annual profits and total equity of our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries, after taking into consideration tax and accounting treatments where material and relevant. The results of these tests are reported to Group Insurance and risk committees every quarter.

Similarly economic capital statistics are produced monthly, with a more detailed exercise undertaken on a quarterly basis. Economic capital measures estimate, on a market consistent economic value basis, the quantum of capital required given the exposures in the Insurance operation. Total exposures, a breakdown by risk class, and movement analysis are presented to the Insurance Risk Management Committee on a quarterly basis.

Credit risk

(Audited)

Description of credit risk

Credit risk arises in two main areas for our insurance manufacturers:

(i) risk of default by debt security counterparties after investing premiums to generate a return for policyholders and shareholders; and

(ii) risk of default by reinsurance counterparties and non-reimbursement for claims made after ceding insurance risk.

How credit risk is managed

Our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries are responsible for the credit risk, quality and performance of their investment portfolios. Our assessment of the creditworthiness of issuers and counterparties is based primarily upon internationally recognised credit ratings and other publicly available information.

Investment credit exposures are monitored against limits by our local insurance manufacturing subsidiaries, and are aggregated and reported to Group Insurance Credit Risk and Group Credit Risk. Stress testing is performed by Group Insurance on the investment credit exposures using credit spread sensitivities and default probabilities.

We use a number of tools to manage and monitor credit risk. These include a credit report which contains a watch-list of investments with current credit concerns and is circulated monthly to senior management in Group Insurance and the individual country CROs to identify investments which may be at risk of future impairment.

Liquidity risk

(Audited)

Description of liquidity risk

It is an inherent characteristic of almost all insurance contracts that there is uncertainty over the amount of claims liabilities that may arise and the timing of their settlement, and this creates liquidity risk.

There are three aspects to liquidity risk. The first arises in normal market conditions and is referred to as funding liquidity risk; specifically, the capacity to raise sufficient cash when needed to meet payment obligations. Secondly, market liquidity risk arises when the size of a particular holding may be so large that a sale cannot be completed around the market price. Finally, standby liquidity risk refers to the capacity to meet payment terms in abnormal conditions.

How liquidity risk is managed

Our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries primarily fund cash outflows arising from claim liabilities from the following sources of cash inflows:

· premiums from new business, policy renewals and recurring premium products;

· interest and dividends on investments and principal repayments of maturing debt investments;

· cash resources; and

· the sale of investments.

They manage liquidity risk by utilising some or all of the following techniques:

· matching cash inflows with expected cash outflows using specific cash flow projections or more general asset and liability matching techniques such as duration matching;

· maintaining sufficient cash resources;

· investing in good credit-quality investments with deep and liquid markets to the degree to which they exist;

· monitoring investment concentrations and restricting them where appropriate, for example, by debt issues or issuers; and

· establishing committed contingency borrowing facilities.

Each of these techniques contributes to mitigating the three types of liquidity risk described above.

Every quarter, our insurance manufacturing subsidiaries are required to complete and submit liquidity risk reports to Group Insurance for collation and review. Liquidity risk is assessed in these reports by measuring changes in expected cumulative net cash flows under a series of stress scenarios designed to determine the effect of reducing expected available liquidity and accelerating cash outflows. This is achieved, for example, by assuming new business or renewals are lower, and surrenders or lapses are greater, than expected.

Insurance risk

(Audited)

Insurance risk is the risk, other than financial risk, of loss transferred from the holder of the insurance contract to the issuer (i.e. HSBC). The principal risk we face is that, over time, the cost of the contract, including claims and benefits may exceed the total amount of premiums and investment income received.

The cost of claims and benefits can be influenced by many factors, including mortality and morbidity experience, lapse and surrender rates.

Insurance risks are controlled by high-level policies and procedures set both centrally and locally, taking into account where appropriate local market conditions and regulatory requirements. Formal underwriting, reinsurance and claims-handling procedures designed to ensure compliance with regulations are applied, supplemented with stress testing.

As well as exercising underwriting controls, we use reinsurance as a means of mitigating exposure to insurance risk. Where we manage our exposure to insurance risk through the use of third-party reinsurers, the associated revenue and manufacturing profit is ceded to the reinsurers. Although reinsurance provides a means of managing insurance risk, such contracts expose us to credit risk, the risk of default by the reinsurer.

The principal drivers of our insurance risk are described below. The liabilities for long-term contracts are set by reference to a range of assumptions around these drivers. These typically reflect the issuers' own experiences. The type and quantum of insurance risk arising from life insurance depends on the type of business, and varies considerably.

· mortality and morbidity: the main contracts which generate exposure to these risks are term assurance, whole life products, critical illness and income protection contracts and annuities. The risks are monitored on a regular basis, and are primarily mitigated by underwriting controls and reinsurance and by retaining the ability in certain cases to amend premiums in the light of experience;

· lapses and surrenders: the risks associated with this are generally mitigated by product design, the application of surrender charges and management actions, for example, managing the level of bonus payments to policyholders. A detailed persistency analysis at a product level is carried out at least on an annual basis; and

· expense risk is mitigated by pricing, for example, retaining the ability in certain cases to amend premiums and/or policyholder charges based on experience, and cost management discipline.

Liabilities are affected by changes in assumptions (see 'Sensitivity analysis' on page 188).

Reputational risk

The Global Head of Financial Crime Compliance and the Global Head of Regulatory Compliance are the risk stewards for reputational risk. The development of policies and an effective control environment for the identification, assessment, management and mitigation of reputational risk are co-ordinated through the Group Reputational Risk Policy Committee ('GRRPC'), which is chaired by the Group Chairman. In parallel, the Global Risk Resolution Committee ('GRRC'), chaired by the Chief Risk Officer, is the highest decision-making forum in the Group for dealing with matters arising from clients or transactions that either present a serious potential reputational risk to the Group or merit a Group-led decision to ensure a consistent risk management approach across the regions and global businesses. Both committees are responsible for keeping the RMM apprised of areas and activities presenting significant reputational risk and, where appropriate, for making recommendations to the RMM to mitigate such risk. Significant issues posing reputational risk are also reported to the Board and the Conduct & Values Committee, where appropriate.

Overseeing all reputational risk matters, the Reputational Risk sub-function is responsible for setting policies to guide the Group's management of reputational risk, devising strategies to protect against reputational risk and advising the global businesses and global functions in helping them identify, assess and mitigate such risks, where possible. This sub-function is led by a central headquarters-based team and supported by teams within each business line and region who help to ensure that issues are directed to the appropriate forums, that decisions are made and implemented effectively, and that management information is generated to aid senior management in the businesses and regions in understanding where reputational risk exists within the Group. Each global business has established a governance process that empowers the Reputational Risk and Client Selection committees to address reputational risk issues at the appropriate level, escalating decisions where appropriate. The global functions manage and escalate reputational risks within established operational risk frameworks.

Standards for all major aspects of business are set for the Group and for individual subsidiaries, businesses and functions. Reputational risks, including environmental, social and governance matters, are considered and assessed by the Board, the GMB, the RMM, subsidiary company boards, Board committees and senior management during the formulation of policy and the establishment of our standards. These policies, which form an integral part of the internal control system (see page 275), are communicated through manuals and statements of policy and are promulgated through internal communications and training. The policies set out our risk appetite and operational procedures for all areas of reputational risk, including financial crime prevention (money laundering, terrorist and proliferation financing, sanctions-breaking and bribery and corruption deterrence), regulatory compliance, conduct-related concerns, environmental impacts, human rights matters and employee relations. The policy manuals address risk issues in detail and co-operation between Group departments and businesses is required to ensure a strong adherence to our risk management system and our sustainability practices.

Fiduciary risk

Business activities in which fiduciary risk is inherent are only permitted within designated lines of business. Fiduciary risk is managed within the designated businesses via a comprehensive policy framework and monitoring of key indicators. The Group's principal fiduciary businesses and activities ('designated businesses and activities') are:

· HSBC Securities Services, which is exposed to fiduciary risk through its funds services and corporate trust and loan agency activities;

· HSBC Global Asset Management, which is exposed to fiduciary risks through its investment management activities on behalf of clients;

· HSBC Global Private Banking, which is exposed to fiduciary risks through its private trust division and discretionary investment management;

· HSBC Insurance, which is exposed to fiduciary risks through the investment management activities it undertakes when providing insurance products and services;

· RBWM Trust Investment Wrappers, required by regulation for the provision of normal RBWM Wealth Management products and services; and

· HSBC Employee Pension Scheme activities, where fiduciary duties may arise as part of carrying out a function of discretion or control over an HSBC employee pension scheme's operations.

The Group's requirements for the management of fiduciary risk are laid down in the fiduciary section of the Global Risk Functional Instruction Manual, which is owned by Global Operational Risk. No business other than the designated businesses may undertake fiduciary activities without notifying Global Operational Risk and receiving specific dispensations from the relevant fiduciary policy requirements.

Other policies around the provision of advice, including investment advice and corporate advisory, and the management of potential conflicts of interest, also mitigate our fiduciary risks.

Pension risk

(Audited)

We operate a number of pension plans throughout the world, as described in the Pension risk section on page 189 and below. A global pension risk framework and accompanying global policies on the management of risks related to defined benefit and defined contribution plans is in place. The Global Pensions Oversight Committee is responsible for the governance and oversight of all pension plans sponsored by HSBC around the world.

In order to fund the benefits associated with defined benefit plans, sponsoring Group companies (and, in some instances, employees) make regular contributions in accordance with advice from actuaries and in consultation with the schemes' trustees (where relevant). The defined benefit plans invest these contributions in a range of investments designed to meet their long-term liabilities.

The level of these contributions has a direct impact on HSBC's cash flow and would normally be set to ensure that there are sufficient funds to meet the cost of the accruing benefits for the future service of active members. However, higher contributions are required when plan assets are considered insufficient to cover the existing pension liabilities. Contribution rates are typically revised annually or triennially, depending on the plan. The agreed contributions to the principal plan are revised triennially.

A deficit in a defined benefit plan may arise from a number of factors, including:

· investments delivering a return below that required to provide the projected plan benefits. This could arise, for example, when there is a fall in the market value of equities, or when increases in long-term interest rates cause a fall in the value of fixed income securities held;

· the prevailing economic environment leading to corporate failures, thus triggering write-downs in asset values (both equity and debt);

· a change in either interest rates or inflation which causes an increase in the value of the scheme liabilities; and

· scheme members living longer than expected (known as longevity risk).

A plan's investment strategy is determined after taking into consideration the market risk inherent in the investments and its consequential impact on potential future contributions. The long-term investment objectives of both HSBC and, where relevant and appropriate, the trustees are:

· to limit the risk of the assets failing to meet the liabilities of the plans over the long term; and

· to maximise returns consistent with an acceptable level of risk so as to control the long-term costs of the defined benefit plans.

In pursuit of these long-term objectives, a benchmark is established for the allocation of the defined benefit plan assets between asset classes. In addition, each permitted asset class has its own benchmarks, such as stock market or property valuation indices and, where relevant, desired levels of out-performance. The benchmarks are reviewed at least triennially within 18 months of the date at which an actuarial valuation is made, or more frequently if required by local legislation or circumstances. The process generally involves an extensive asset and liability review.

Ultimate responsibility for investment strategy rests with either the trustees or, in certain circumstances, a management committee. The degree of independence of the trustees from HSBC varies in different jurisdictions, however all fiduciaries are required to put the plan members' needs above all others.

Defined contribution plans result in far less exposure to market risk for the Group, but remain exposed to operational and reputational risks as they place the responsibility and flexibility more directly with employees. To manage these risks, the performance of defined contribution investment funds is monitored and local engagement with employees is actively promoted to ensure they are provided with sufficient information about the options available to them.

Pension plans in the UK

The HSBC Bank (UK) Pension Scheme (the principal plan) has both defined benefit and defined contribution sections. The defined benefit section accounts for approximately 72% of our total defined benefit obligations around the world. All new employees have joined the defined contribution section since 1996 and from 1 July 2015 the defined benefit section was fully closed to future accrual so that all future pension provision for all employees is provided by the defined contribution section. The principal plan is overseen by an independent corporate trustee who has a fiduciary responsibility for the operation of the pension plan. The trustee is responsible for monitoring and managing the investment strategy and administration of scheme benefits. The principal plan holds a diversified portfolio of investments to meet future cash flow liabilities arising from accrued benefits as they fall due to be paid. The trustee of the principal plan is required to produce a written Statement of Investment Principles which governs decision-making about how investments are made and the need for adequate diversification is taken into account in the choice of asset allocation and manager structure in the defined benefit section. Longevity risk in the principal plan is assessed as part of the measurement of the pension liability and managed through the funding process of the plan.

Sustainability risk

Sustainability risks arise from the provision of financial services to companies or projects which indirectly result in unacceptable impacts on people or on the environment. The Risk Function, with input from Global Corporate Sustainability, is mandated to manage these risks globally working through local offices as appropriate. Sustainability Risk Managers have regional or national responsibilities for advising on and managing environmental and social risks. The Risk Function's responsibilities in relation to sustainability risk include:

· formulating sustainability risk policies. This includes overseeing our sustainability risk standards, our application of the Equator Principles and our sustainability policies (covering agricultural commodities, chemicals, defence, energy, forestry, freshwater infrastructure, mining and metals, and World Heritage Sites and Ramsar Wetlands); undertaking an independent review of transactions where sustainability risks are assessed to be high; and supporting our operating companies to assess similar risks of a lower magnitude;

· building and implementing systems-based processes to ensure consistent application of policies, reduce the costs of sustainability risk reviews and capture management information to measure and report on the effect of our lending and investment activities on sustainable development; and

· providing training and capacity building within our operating companies to ensure sustainability risks are identified and mitigated consistently to either our own standards, international standards or local regulations, whichever is higher.

This information is provided by RNS

The company news service from the London Stock Exchange

END

ACSUWUVRNWAOAAR

Companies

HSBC Holdings (HSBA)

Monday, 25th November 2024

COMPANIES COVERED:

AAL KGF JD.

JD Sports claws back some of last week’s earnings-driven losses, Anglo American announces disposal but gains in line with sector peers and Kingfisher pressured as profit guidance lowered.

Full Archive

UK 100

Latest directors dealings

3 hours ago Sage Group
4 hours ago Utilico Emerging Markets Ltd (DI)
4 hours ago Howden Joinery Group
5 hours ago Schroder BSC Social Impact Trust
5 hours ago Vodafone Group

All directors dealings today