Question ID: 2439
Regulation Reference: (EU) 2017/653 - PRIIPs Delegated Regulation for key information document
Topic: Packaged retail and insurance-based investment products (PRIIPs)
Status: Rejected
Date of submission: 19 May 2022
Question
Regarding the calculations of the Stressed scenario for Category 2 discussed in Annex IV in the delegated regulation 2017/653 (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02017R0653-…;
Mainly the confusion comes from paragraph 11, which says “…where zα is a proper selected value of the PRIIP at the extreme percentile that corresponds to 1 % for 1 year and to 5 % for the other holding periods.”. For all other scenarios the values for zα have been given (they are each scenarios respective N(0,1)-percentiles). In “PRIIPs – Flow diagram for the risk and reward calculations in the PRIIPs KID” (Flow diagrams for the risk and reward calculations.pdf (europa.eu)), Section 4 Part 4 b), they use N(0,1)-percentiles for zα in the stressed scenario as well. Though when reading paragraph 11 directly after having read paragraph 10 (d), where one takes percentiles from a calculated sample set rather that a N(0,1)-distribution, it made me think one was supposed to use a sample set’s (the historical lognormal returns) percentiles for zα in paragraph 11 rather than the percentiles from a N(0,1)-distribution.
Can you confirm that one indeed is meant to use the percentiles from a N(0,1)-distribution for zα in paragraph 11 as is done in the “PRIIPs – Flow diagram…”-file?
Background of the question
Review of applied calculations
EIOPA answer
Yes, it is necessary to use the zα (z-score) of the standard normal distribution (i.e. as you mention the N(0,1)-distribution) corresponding to either the 99th percentile (period < 1year), which is -2,32, or the 90th percentile (period > 1year), which is -1,64, as described in the ESA flow diagram