An increasing number of banks and other credit institutions are offering savings via digital deposit platforms. This makes them more vulnerable since the deposits volume could decrease rapidly. FI notes in a report that some of the institutions do not sufficiently consider these risks, in part when calculating the liquidity buffer required for such deposits. A legal position specifies how we will interpret the rules.
Deposit platforms are digital banking services that make it easy for consumers to move their money. This mobility can benefit consumers, but it also makes banks and other credit institutions more vulnerable. A report from FI shows that the volume of overnight deposits via the platforms for an individual institution can decrease by as much as 50 per cent from one month to the next. The report also shows that the institutions interpret the rules differently in a way that impacts, among other things, their calculation of the liquidity requirements for deposits via deposit platforms. Several institutions do not sufficiently consider the risks.
In our legal position, we clarify that the firms providing the deposit platforms should be considered deposit brokers. This guides banks and other credit institution in the matter of how they should apply the regulation when calculating the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) and the net stable funding ratio (NSFR).
"We now show how the rules should be interpreted so the institutions can do the same thing and consider the risks. This strengthens their resilience, which is important since we are seeing that deposits via the deposit platforms are increasing," says Åsa Lööw, Director of Market and Liquidity Risks.
Deposits via digital platforms increasingly common
Since the autumn of 2022, FI has analysed platform deposits by sending a survey to banks and other credit institutions. Between 2022 and the end of 2023, the number of institutions offering deposits via the platforms increased from 14 to 16, according to the report. At the same time, the increase in the deposit volume was estimated to be 24 per cent (SEK 32 million). Our view is therefore that platform deposits have become more common, primarily at smaller credit institutions that primarily fund themselves vi deposits from the public.
When institutions should adjust the weights
Our view on how the rules should be interpreted has not previously been known by the institutions. For reporting up to an including 30 September, institutions therefore may use the weights and factors that they have previously used when calculating their liquidity requirements. The weights thus do not need to be adjusted as per 30 September, even if this legal position goes into effect on this date. However, for the next reporting occasion, the institutions should use the weights and factors referred to in this legal position.
