Deposit insurance development (on the example of Ukraine)

The generalization of scientific approaches to the assessment of the financial stability of the banking system has demonstrated the multivariance of views on structuring and listing of financial stability indicators and has made it possible to distinguish three main ones: on the basis of macroeconomic and macro financial indicators; on the basis of separate indicators; based on synthetic indicators. It is proved that the latter is most effective since the large number and variability of financial ratios used by different authors to assess the level of financial stability of banking systems does not allow for unambiguous results. A hierarchic structure of indicators of the stability of the banking system is proposed, which is characterized by the simultaneous existence of a certain number, not ordered in a heterarchic manner. In accordance with it, the integral index of financial stability of the banking system includes subindices: stability of the NBU, stability of system banks, banks with foreign capital, banks with private capital, financial vulnerability of the banking system. The expediency of accounting for the indicators of financial risk assessment: credit, liquidity risk, interest rate, investment risk, unstable resource base risk, which are characterized by such financial ratios as part of provisions for depreciation of loans in the loan portfolio, is justified in the composition of such a synthetic indicator of the financial stability of the banking system; the norm of instant liquidity; net interest margin; part of the provision for depreciation of securities in the securities portfolio; coefficient of instability of the resource base. Also, indicators for assessing the stability of the central bank were proposed: indicators of the adequacy of reserves; indicators of the effectiveness of monetary policy; indicators of the effectiveness of foreign exchange regulation; indicators of compliance of banking supervision with the main principles of efficiency. This approach will allow taking into account all the structural components of the banking system in the process of assessing financial stability, on the one hand, and in time to identify potential threats to the loss of stability, on the other.

The article deals with topical issues to develop the banking sector in Kazakhstan as their condition assessment, weaknesses, strengths, problems and basic ways of development of Kazakhstan’s second-tier banks in the current environment, these issues are discussed in this article and determine the relevance of the material presented. The need to address the main problems in the development of the banking sector is due to the fact that it is represented as a fundamental element of the financial system. Moreover, under the modern conditions, it is subject to the impact of financial globalization, crisis phenomena in the world economy, the growth of uncertainty in the world financial market, which determines a number of negative consequences for the stable development of banking activities. Effective functioning of the banking system allows ensuring the sustainable economic development of any state, as the banking sector participates in the redistribution of funds and financing of the real sector of the country’s economy. At the present stage of the development, the issues of dealing with the key problems of the development of the banking sector acquire special relevance on a global scale, since the financial crisis has revealed the shortcomings of the current system of banking regulation and supervision. In this regard, in the crisis conditions, the state intervention in regulation of banking activities has intensified, the role of risk management in commercial banks has increased, the requirements to the bank’s capital, and the quality of assets has increased. Volatility and instability of the world financial markets require the search for new approaches in the implementation of banking activities to maintain sustainable development, increase margins in the banking business, which determines the relevance of this study. The main results of the research show the influence of external and internal factors that inhibit the development of banking activity.

Highly concentrated banking system risks and the cumulative effect due to their accumulation act as a driver for improving the macro-prudential policy implemented by central banks. For this reason, an effectively and comprehensively assessed systemic risk in the banking system is declared an express condition for the early detection of its production sources and blocking of potential spreading channels, reducing the possible implementation. In light of this, the article develops an approach to the aggregated systemic risk assessment and interpretation of its results. The proposed approach is based on the considered influence exerted by financial risks of systemically important banks on the destabilized banking system and interconnections between banks in the context of the possible crisis impulse spreading. The following steps should be accomplished to form an aggregated systemic risk indicator in the banking system. Firstly, the differentiation of systemically important banks by the degree of their systemic importance; secondly, an integral assessment of the bank operation riskiness within certain bank groups; thirdly, the cumulative composition of the corresponding integral indicators, taking into account their weighting coefficients based on two criteria, namely values of the systemic importance indicator differentiating the bank groups, and the correlation of their risks. Interpreting the quantitative measurement results with regard to the systemic risk in the banking system is followed by the recommendations below: the systemic risk grading into high, medium and low levels and the respective definition of the threshold aggregated systemic risk indicator value which informs about the possible systemic crisis when approached; justification of the selected supervision regime types (strengthened, moderate or weakened) for systemically important banks, depending on the riskiness level specific for their operation and the systemic importance degree. The developed approach to measuring the systemic risk by means of constructing an aggregated indicator and interpreting the obtained results was being tested considering the financial risk indicators of the systemically important banks in Ukraine during 2009–2018.