FRS 109’s introduction of the Expected Credit Loss (“ECL”) model has fundamentally changed how provisioning for credit losses is being looked at by banks and other financial institutions. The transition to expected credit loss models requires cross functional support, with expertise around risk management, finance, IT and economic forecasting, being particularly important.
Grant Thornton’s ECL modelling specialists combine such skills and help implement provisioning methodology and process which are right for your business.
Three ‘S’ define the key success factors for ECL implementation, i.e.
Appropriate with reference to size and scale of the business, product profile, customer characteristics, and data/system maturity
Ability to provide reasonable results in various economic scenarios
Being efficient and accurate, and hence future proof
PD refers to the likelihood of a loan defaulting over a time horizon. It is further bifurcated into through the cycle PD (TTC PD) and point in time PD (PIT PD).
TTC PD is calculated as the long run average of historical defaults rates observed by the entity.
PIT PD represents forecasted PDs based on current and expected macroeconomic conditions. PIT PD is a function of TTC PD and macroeconomic variables.
Computation of PD is a complex process that involves analysis of data of years of historical experience. We leverage our proficiency in technical accounting and risk management and technological skills to implement flexible and scalable models for our clients.
We have experience of implementing several models for modelling probability of default on varied portfolios. Choice of the model depends on the nature of portfolio and system/data capabilities.
Commonly used methodologies include:
LGD is defined as the percentage of exposure that is not expected to be recovered in the event of default.
LGD is modelled by analyzing post default recoveries from loans defaulted in the past. Key considerations include considerations of nature and value of collateral, other credit enhancements and cost of recoveries.
Statistical techniques such as regression can be used to incorporate forward looking information in LGD when sufficient historical data is available.
For Stage 3 loans, time elapsed since default date should be considered while applying LGD as per the historical experience of the company.
Our approach on LGD and choice of model adapts to your products and data/ system capabilities.
Generally, the following methods are used to calculate LGD:
EAD refers to the expected exposure to a borrower in the event of default. The methodology for EAD varies based on the nature of the product.
Exposure at the balance sheet date is the key input for EAD.
However, maturity pattern is used to model the expected changes in loan exposure over the lifetime of the asset. Entities are also required to consider the impact of expected prepayments to factor in the behavioral maturity of the asset instead of the contractual maturity.
For revolving facilities and assets with undrawn exposures, credit conversion factor (CCF) is applied to compute EAD. Entities can use workout CCF based on their own data or use regulatory/market proxies. Entities are required to consider their credit risk practices while determining the behavioral maturity for revolving facilities.
ECL reflects an unbiased, probability weighted estimate of cash shortfalls on the loan, and takes into account past events, current conditions and forecasts of future economic conditions.
While PD, LGD and EAD are the key components in ECL computation, the ECL provision is impacted by various other considerations like:
As part of our services, we guide you through navigating the challenges faced while evaluating these considerations to ensure effective ECL implementation.
The key policies mentioned would be agreed upon in this step.
The result of this step shall be well deliberated, and documented conclusions on these areas.
Examples of possible questions to consider include:
Subscribe for timely technical updates and keep on the pulse with industry developments
IFRS 18 replaces IAS 1 ‘Presentation of Financial Statements’ for annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2027. Our ‘Insights into IFRS 18’ series explains the new requirements of IFRS 18, highlighting some areas of the standard that we believe will be challenging to apply in practice.
We have released the 2026 edition of our annual publication Navigating the Changes to IFRS, updated for the changes to IFRS Accounting Standards issued in 2025.
