How does the Vasicek single-factor model work for credit portfolio loss estimation, and what is the granularity adjustment?
I'm studying credit portfolio models for FRM Part II and the Vasicek model keeps appearing as the foundation for Basel's IRB approach. I understand it uses a single systematic factor, but how does it derive the portfolio loss distribution, and what happens when the portfolio isn't perfectly granular?
The Vasicek single-factor model is the theoretical foundation for the Basel IRB capital formula. It models credit losses in a portfolio where each obligor's default depends on a common systematic factor (the economy) and an idiosyncratic factor.
Model Setup
Each obligor i defaults if its asset value falls below a threshold:
> Ai = sqrt(rho) Z + sqrt(1 - rho) ei
Where Z is the common systematic factor (standard normal), ei is the idiosyncratic factor (standard normal, independent), and rho is the asset correlation. Obligor i defaults if Ai < N_inv(PDi), where PDi is its probability of default.
Conditional Default Probability
Conditional on a realization of the systematic factor Z = z:
> PD(z) = N[(N_inv(PD) - sqrt(rho) * z) / sqrt(1 - rho)]
This is the probability that any single obligor defaults given the state of the economy. In a bad economy (z very negative), PD(z) rises dramatically — this is how the model generates correlated defaults.
Example: Silverlake Bank's Corporate Portfolio
Silverlake Bank has a portfolio of 500 corporate loans, each with PD = 2% and asset correlation rho = 0.20. Under the Vasicek assumption of infinite granularity, the portfolio loss at the 99.9th percentile is:
> Loss(99.9%) = LGD N[(N_inv(0.02) + sqrt(0.20) N_inv(0.999)) / sqrt(1 - 0.20)]
Computing step by step:
- N_inv(0.02) = -2.054
- N_inv(0.999) = 3.090
- sqrt(0.20) = 0.4472
- sqrt(0.80) = 0.8944
Loss(99.9%) = LGD N[(-2.054 + 0.4472 3.090) / 0.8944]
= LGD * N[(-2.054 + 1.382) / 0.8944]
= LGD * N[-0.751]
= LGD * 0.2263
With LGD = 45%, the 99.9% portfolio loss = 0.45 * 0.2263 = 10.18% of exposure.
The Granularity Adjustment
The Vasicek formula assumes the portfolio is infinitely granular (each loan is infinitesimally small). Real portfolios have concentration: a few large exposures can dominate. The granularity adjustment adds a correction:
> GA = (1/2) HHI [VaR_adjusted_term]
Where HHI is the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index of exposure concentration. A portfolio where one loan is 10% of total exposure has much higher GA than one where each loan is 0.2%.
FRM exam tip: Know the conditional default probability formula and be able to plug in numbers. Understand that higher asset correlation means fatter tails in the loss distribution (more correlated defaults in downturns). The granularity adjustment is tested conceptually — know that concentrated portfolios need more capital than the base IRB formula suggests.
For more credit risk modeling practice, explore our FRM Part II materials.
Master Part II with our FRM Course
64 lessons · 120+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
How exactly do futures margin calls work, and what happens if I can't meet one?
How do you calculate the settlement amount on a Forward Rate Agreement (FRA)?
When should I use Monte Carlo simulation instead of parametric VaR, and how does it actually work?
Parametric VaR vs. Historical Simulation VaR — when does each method fail?
What are the core components of an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) framework, and how does it differ from siloed risk management?
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.