{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/105864"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/105864","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Implications of the new capital regulations for farm credit system associations","abstract":"This study compares the implications of changing from the prior capital standards to the current capital standards on Farm Credit System associations. The current capital standards effective as of January 1, 2017, were implemented to provide a higher level of safety and soundness. “Safety and soundness” refers to the ability to absorb risk and remain solvent. The difference in alternative capital standards’ safety and soundness are compared by reverse stress testing to find the degree of stress needed to breach a minimum capital standard. The reverse stress tests are done using the Association Planning Model (APM) to project pro forma financial statements and capital ratios. The APM uses seven key risk factors including loan growth rate, three measures of credit quality, two measures of interest rate spreads, and percentage change in non-interest expense. The key risk factors are all projected using a percentile of stress from each association’s unique history except for the interest rate spreads measures due to them being non stationary in their histories. The APM methodology provides a standardized stress scenario across associations allowing for the relative capital adequacy of associations to be measured. The reverse stress tests conducted using the APM indicate that the current capital standards provide a slightly higher level of safety and soundness in general, but most association hold capital far in excess of the minimums, and thus neither are binding in the near term.","abstract_html":"This study compares the implications of changing from the prior capital standards to the current capital standards on Farm Credit System associations. The current capital standards effective as of January 1, 2017, were implemented to provide a higher level of safety and soundness. “Safety and soundness” refers to the ability to absorb risk and remain solvent. The difference in alternative capital standards’ safety and soundness are compared by reverse stress testing to find the degree of stress needed to breach a minimum capital standard. The reverse stress tests are done using the Association Planning Model (APM) to project pro forma financial statements and capital ratios. The APM uses seven key risk factors including loan growth rate, three measures of credit quality, two measures of interest rate spreads, and percentage change in non-interest expense. The key risk factors are all projected using a percentile of stress from each association’s unique history except for the interest rate spreads measures due to them being non stationary in their histories. The APM methodology provides a standardized stress scenario across associations allowing for the relative capital adequacy of associations to be measured. The reverse stress tests conducted using the APM indicate that the current capital standards provide a slightly higher level of safety and soundness in general, but most association hold capital far in excess of the minimums, and thus neither are binding in the near term.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Brandt, Cody M."],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"M.S.","degree_level":"Thesis","degree_discipline":"Agricultural and Applied Economics","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Sherrick, Bruce J.","Mallory, Mindy","Paulson, Nick"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2019,"date_issued":"2019-11-26T20:58:28Z","date_published":"2019-11-26T20:58:28Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:45Z","subjects":["Stress Testing, Capital"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":["Copyright 2019 Cody Brandt"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/105864","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Sherrick, Bruce J.","Mallory, Mindy","Paulson, Nick"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Brandt, Cody M."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2019-11-26T20:58:28Z","2023-07-26T05:00:00Z","2019-06-14","2019-08"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Agricultural and Applied Economics"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["M.S."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Stress Testing, Capital"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright 2019 Cody Brandt"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/105864"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["This study compares the implications of changing from the prior capital standards to the current capital standards on Farm Credit System associations. The current capital standards effective as of January 1, 2017, were implemented to provide a higher level of safety and soundness. “Safety and soundness” refers to the ability to absorb risk and remain solvent. The difference in alternative capital standards’ safety and soundness are compared by reverse stress testing to find the degree of stress needed to breach a minimum capital standard. The reverse stress tests are done using the Association Planning Model (APM) to project pro forma financial statements and capital ratios. The APM uses seven key risk factors including loan growth rate, three measures of credit quality, two measures of interest rate spreads, and percentage change in non-interest expense. The key risk factors are all projected using a percentile of stress from each association’s unique history except for the interest rate spreads measures due to them being non stationary in their histories. The APM methodology provides a standardized stress scenario across associations allowing for the relative capital adequacy of associations to be measured. The reverse stress tests conducted using the APM indicate that the current capital standards provide a slightly higher level of safety and soundness in general, but most association hold capital far in excess of the minimums, and thus neither are binding in the near term.","Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'Closed Access', the embargo will last until 2021-08-01","The student, Cody Brandt, accepted the attached license on 2019-06-12 at 15:03.","The student, Cody Brandt, submitted this Thesis for approval on 2019-06-12 at 15:21.","This Thesis was approved for publication on 2019-06-14 at 08:41.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #14032 on 2019-11-26 at 13:59:49","Made available in DSpace on 2019-11-26T20:58:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 BRANDT-THESIS-2019.pdf: 2252542 bytes, checksum: 77ee611d65d8bb5d68366cde788e40ce (MD5) LICENSE.txt: 4208 bytes, checksum: ea3065d5e568b9329d79115b89438380 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019-06-14","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 113010 Lift date: 2021-11-26T20:58:44Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 113010 Lift date: 2021-11-26T20:59:54Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","U of I Only Restriction set for Item 113010 on 2021-07-26T19:49:52Z with date 2023-07-26 by bran3@illinois.edu.","Author requested U of I Access Only for 2 years (extension) via the Graduate College","U of I Only"]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Implications of the new capital regulations for farm credit system associations"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Sherrick, Bruce J.","Mallory, Mindy","Paulson, Nick"],"dc:creator":["Brandt, Cody M."],"dc:date":["2019-11-26T20:58:28Z","2023-07-26T05:00:00Z","2019-06-14","2019-08"],"dc:description":["This study compares the implications of changing from the prior capital standards to the current capital standards on Farm Credit System associations. The current capital standards effective as of January 1, 2017, were implemented to provide a higher level of safety and soundness. “Safety and soundness” refers to the ability to absorb risk and remain solvent. The difference in alternative capital standards’ safety and soundness are compared by reverse stress testing to find the degree of stress needed to breach a minimum capital standard. The reverse stress tests are done using the Association Planning Model (APM) to project pro forma financial statements and capital ratios. The APM uses seven key risk factors including loan growth rate, three measures of credit quality, two measures of interest rate spreads, and percentage change in non-interest expense. The key risk factors are all projected using a percentile of stress from each association’s unique history except for the interest rate spreads measures due to them being non stationary in their histories. The APM methodology provides a standardized stress scenario across associations allowing for the relative capital adequacy of associations to be measured. The reverse stress tests conducted using the APM indicate that the current capital standards provide a slightly higher level of safety and soundness in general, but most association hold capital far in excess of the minimums, and thus neither are binding in the near term.","Submission published under a 24 month embargo labeled 'Closed Access', the embargo will last until 2021-08-01","The student, Cody Brandt, accepted the attached license on 2019-06-12 at 15:03.","The student, Cody Brandt, submitted this Thesis for approval on 2019-06-12 at 15:21.","This Thesis was approved for publication on 2019-06-14 at 08:41.","DSpace SAF Submission Ingestion Package generated from Vireo submission #14032 on 2019-11-26 at 13:59:49","Made available in DSpace on 2019-11-26T20:58:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 BRANDT-THESIS-2019.pdf: 2252542 bytes, checksum: 77ee611d65d8bb5d68366cde788e40ce (MD5) LICENSE.txt: 4208 bytes, checksum: ea3065d5e568b9329d79115b89438380 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019-06-14","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 113010 Lift date: 2021-11-26T20:58:44Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 113010 Lift date: 2021-11-26T20:59:54Z Reason: Author requested closed access (OA after 2yrs) in Vireo ETD system","U of I Only Restriction set for Item 113010 on 2021-07-26T19:49:52Z with date 2023-07-26 by bran3@illinois.edu.","Author requested U of I Access Only for 2 years (extension) via the Graduate College","U of I Only"],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/105864"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:rights":["Copyright 2019 Cody Brandt"],"dc:subject":["Stress Testing, Capital"],"dc:title":["Implications of the new capital regulations for farm credit system associations"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Agricultural and Applied Economics"],"thesis:degree_level":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_name":["M.S."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:24:45Z"}