2019 Universal registration document and annual financial report - BNP PARIBAS 197

4Consolidated finanCial statements for the year ended 31 deCemBer 2019

4

Notes to the financial statements

Debt securities at fair value through equity include EUR 117 million classified as stage 3 at 31 December 2019 (EUR 114 million at 31 December 2018). For these securities, the credit impairment recognised in the profit and loss account has been charged to the negative changes in value recognized in equity for EUR 113 million at 31 December 2019 (EUR 112 million at 31 December 2018).

The option to recognise certain equity instruments at fair value through equity was retained in particular for shares held through strategic partnerships and shares that the Group is required to hold in order to carry out certain activities.

During the year ended 31 December 2019, the Group did not sell any of these investments and no unrealised gains or losses were transferred to retained earnings .

5.d MEASUREMENT OF THE FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

Valuation process

BNP Paribas has retained the fundamental principle that it should have a unique and integrated processing chain for producing and controlling the valuations of financial instruments that are used for the purpose of daily risk management and financial reporting. All these processes are based on a common economic valuation which is a core component of business decisions and risk management strategies.

Economic value is composed of mid-market value, to which add valuation adjustments.

Mid-market value is derived from external data or valuation techniques that maximise the use of observable and market-based data. Mid-market value is a theoretical additive value which does not take account of i) the direction of the transaction or its impact on the existing risks in the portfolio, ii) the nature of the counterparties, and iii) the aversion of a market participant to particular risks inherent in the instrument, the market in which it is traded, or the risk management strategy.

Valuation adjustments take into account valuation uncertainty and include market and credit risk premiums to reflect costs that could be incurred in case of an exit transaction in the principal market.

Fair value generally equals the economic value, subject to limited adjustments, such as own credit adjustments, which are specifically required by IFRS standards.

The main valuation adjustments are presented in the section below.

Valuation adjustments

Valuation adjustments retained by BNP Paribas for determining fair values are as follows:

Bid/offer adjustments: the bid/offer range reflects the additional exit cost for a price taker and symmetrically the compensation sought by dealers to bear the risk of holding the position or closing it out by accepting another dealer s price.

BNP Paribas assumes that the best estimate of an exit price is the bid or offer price, unless there is evidence that another point in the bid/offer range would provide a more representative exit price.

Input uncertainty adjustments: when the observation of prices or data inputs required by valuation techniques is difficult or irregular, an uncertainty exists on the exit price. There are several ways to gauge the degree of uncertainty on the exit price such as measuring the dispersion of the available price indications or estimating the possible ranges of the inputs to a valuation technique.

Model uncertainty adjustments: these relate to situations where valuation uncertainty is due to the valuation technique used, even though observable inputs might be available. This situation arises when the risks inherent in the instruments are different from those available in the observable data, and therefore the valuation technique involves assumptions that cannot be easily corroborated.

Credit valuation adjustment (CVA): the CVA adjustment applies to valuations and market quotations whereby the credit worthiness of the counterparty is not reflected. It aims to account for the possibility that the counterparty may default and that BNP Paribas may not receive the full fair value of the transactions.

In determining the cost of exiting or transferring counterparty risk exposures, the relevant market is deemed to be an inter-dealer market. However, the determination of CVA remains judgemental due to:

■ the possible absence or lack of price discovery in the inter-dealer market;

■ the influence of the regulatory landscape relating to counterparty risk on the market participants pricing behaviour; and

■ the absence of a dominant business model for managing counterparty risk.

The CVA model is grounded on the same exposures as those used for regulatory purposes. The model attempts to estimate the cost of an optimal risk management strategy based on i) implicit incentives and constraints inherent in the regulations in force and their evolutions, ii) market perception of the probability of default and iii) default parameters used for regulatory purposes.

Funding valuation adjustment (FVA): when valuation techniques are used for the purpose of deriving fair value, funding assumptions related to the future expected cash flows are an integral part of the mid-market valuation, notably through the use of appropriate discount rates. These assumptions reflect what the Bank anticipates as being the effective funding conditions of the instrument that a market participant would consider. This notably takes into account the existence and terms of any collateral agreement. In particular, for non- or imperfectly collateralized derivative instruments, they include an explicit adjustment to the interbank interest rate.