Planning Liquidity Requirements during the Covid-19 crisis

The regulated financial services sector is familiar with liquidity management and planning under normal and stressed environments, but for most other corporate treasury functions it is not an area that often merits any structure or guidance.

We have seen a fundamental shift in the liquidity markets over past couple of weeks and while the change has been sudden, it will have long lasting implications for how corporate treasuries think about their liquidity strategy. During these extraordinary times, it is helpful to consider some of the approaches adopted by those working in banks, insurers and asset managers.

How do banks approach liquidity management and planning?

Banks have to manage to minimum liquidity requirements, as detailed in Basel frameworks, and provide regular reporting on these metrics to their regulators. The Liquidity Coverage Ratio (“LCR”) is one of the two key metrics (the other being the Net Stable Funding Ratio). It is designed to ensure that banks hold a sufficient liquidity buffer – defined as a reserve of high-quality liquid assets (“HQLA”) to allow them to survive a period of significant liquidity stress lasting 30 days. The period is selected as the minimum period for corrective action to be taken by management.

The LCR liquidity stress scenario is prescriptive and based on assuming:

  • external funding sources have closed
  • no additional inflows from customers
  • outflows maintained at existing levels.

Banks also undertake reverse stress testing which looks at the various scenarios that would need to arise for the firm to cease to be able to pay out on its obligations. This may include sale of assets at distressed prices, accelerated outflows and delays in liquidating certain assets.

Building a liquidity forecast

Adopting a structured approach in developing a forward-looking liquidity risk view is key. There are three key focus areas which will input into the model:  

  1. what are my assumptions for income?
  2. what are my assumptions for payments?
    1. core payments?
    2. discretionary payments?
    3. sales-related payments?
  3. what type of recovery should I plan for – a V-shaped or a very fat U-shaped?

There are several models that one can adopt to determine liquidity requirements, but the following three-step approach may be effective across a range of businesses and circumstances.

Estimate Liquidity Requirements

  • Apply a top down approach to estimating liquidity requirements as the current bottom-up cash forecasting approach is unlikely to provide any insights given the current situation. Supplement this with data on any large customers or suppliers where the payments are being monitored closely.
  • Either follow the forecasts from the OECD or the WTO as featured in the ACT weekly Covid-19 newsletters (https://www.treasurers.org/node/374193) or assume a rapidly falling decline over the next 3 months with a flat line over the following 3 months and then a slow recovery until mid-2021.
  • Apply an 80:20 rule that ignores any smaller items of transactional activity
  • Assume a faster decline in revenues or assume no revenues, depending on your particular industry sector
  • Set a buffer / contingency for the unknown. Given the nature of the crisis, decide if 10% is sufficient or it should be increased to 15% or even 20%

Undertake scenario analysis 

  • Undertake a range of scenarios to create a “funnel of outcomes”. The value of this is that it will help you and your board to assess your own version of likely outcomes and to collectively agree on a suitable path for your organisation. It is also a reminder of what the best (and the worst) outcome could be. 
  • Regularly review assumptions and update outcomes.

Explore all your funding options 

  • Identify any low points in your liquidity requirement and use this to work out when to draw down on any committed facilities. 
  • Note that drawing down all of your committed facilities may seem like the best thing to do but, as covered in the article by Clare Francis – CEO U.K. & Regional Head Global Banking Europe at Standard Chartered Bank (https://www.treasurers.org/covid-19-how-much-liquidity-enough) -, it’s not helpful to the overall financial ecosystem and currently there’s no sense of a lack of liquidity at the banking industry level.

Thanks to Nick Burge and Harsh Gambani from Standard Chartered Bank for their assistance with this article.

Naresh Aggarwal
Associate Director – Policy and Technical
ACT

Articles


Photo from From Bitcoin to Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)

From Bitcoin to Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)

In recent months, we have seen the first steps of concerted moves towards CBDCs. This change of attitude is welcome as it complements other private and public initiatives in the world of payments which is innovating at a greater pace than ever.

Read
Photo from Stronger FX Hedging Strategies: a Pandemic Game-changer

Stronger FX Hedging Strategies: a Pandemic Game-changer

As the pandemic continues to throw markets into confusion, forcing corporates to battle against unprecedented volatility, treasury functions have an opportunity, albeit uninvited, to prove their strategic value – especially in relation to FX risk management.

Read
Photo from General Trends in TMS Solutions

General Trends in TMS Solutions

TMS’s have evolved over time and especially in the last couple of years with a huge leap in technologies. Treasurers are investigating how TMS can help in further modernising the finance function in the coming years.

Read
Photo from A Multidisciplinary Approach to Preventing Payment Fraud

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Preventing Payment Fraud

An escalation in fraud and cybercrime activities has been observed in recent months, as cyber attackers have been able to make use of the weaknesses caused by the current health crisis.

Read
Photo from Return on Purpose

Return on Purpose

During the pandemic we have increasingly heard how important it is that companies consider their corporate purpose. Typically, this results in a series of nebulous and hard to define concepts, created by marketing and consultancy firms. Return on Purpose looks at a variety of activities that a company undertakes and identifies individual RoIs for each of them to come up with an overall holistic view.

Read