Skip to main content

ALLL backtesting at the portfolio level

May 29, 2014
Read Time: 0 min

On the simplest level, backtesting of the ALLL can be completed on global level, comparing the institution’s ALLL to its realized losses over a period of time. An example is shown below:

Figure 1


In this example, the institution is looking at its ALLL and comparing that amount with annualized Net Charge-offs Year to Date, an approximation of the whole year’s charge-offs. This comparison assesses the coverage of the ALLL relative to realized losses. 

In this analysis, the institution should be asking:

1. How many years of losses can be estimated to be covered by any periodend allowance when examining the current period allowance as compared to Net Charge-offs Year to Date (annualized)?

In this specific example, the bank’s calculated ALLL exceeds the realized net charge-offs consistently by at least 25 percent. In 2012, it would appear that, overall, the bank had approximately 150 percent coverage of their realized losses based on the ALLL that was reported in each quarter.

2. Does the current period’s Net Charge-offs Year to Date (annualized) exceed the prior period’s allowance? If so, are there any factors that could have been identified that would have caused the ALLL to increase?

This takes Question 1 a little farther. If there are periods in which annualized net charge-offs exceed the prior period’s allowance, then it is important to dig more into what reasons there were for charge-offs to increase and where it could have been identified in the ALLL. This requires a more in-depth review of specific FAS 5 (ASC 450-20) segments– specifically segment size and growth, loss rates and the qualitative and environmental factors.

3. Were there significant changes from one quarter to the next in the net charge-offs? If so, did the allowance increase accordingly? What were the factors that caused the increase in net charge-offs? If the ALLL did not increase, what factors could have been identified (that could be watched more closely in the future) to increase the ALLL accordingly? 

This is similar to Question 2. Again, it requires a more in-depth review of the various FAS 5 segments to determine which segments had an increase in charge-offs that would ideally have led to an increase in required reserve.

To learn more about backtesting, view our webinar on Backtesting your ALLL methodology.

About the Author


Raleigh, N.C.-based Sageworks, a leading provider of lending, credit risk, and portfolio risk software that enables banks and credit unions to efficiently grow and improve the borrower experience, was founded in 1998. Using its platform, Sageworks analyzed over 11.5 million loans, aggregated the corresponding loan data, and created the largest

Full Bio

About Abrigo

Abrigo enables U.S. financial institutions to support their communities through technology that fights financial crime, grows loans and deposits, and optimizes risk. Abrigo's platform centralizes the institution's data, creates a digital user experience, ensures compliance, and delivers efficiency for scale and profitable growth.

Make Big Things Happen.