Blog

• Basel III risk-based capital ratios increased in the second half of 2024.
• Banks’ leverage ratio and Net Stable Funding Ratio remain stable while Liquidity Coverage Ratio decreased.
• Dashboards offer new features to explore results.

Basel III risk-based capital ratios increased while leverage ratios and Net Stable Funding Ratios (NSFRs) remained stable for large internationally active banks in the second half of 2024, according to the latest Basel III monitoring exercise, published today.

The report, based on data as of 31 December 2024, sets out trends in current bank capital and liquidity ratios and the impact of the fully phased-in Basel III framework, including the December 2017 finalisation of the Basel III reforms and the January 2019 finalisation of the market risk framework. It covers both large internationally active banks (Group 1) and other smaller banks (Group 2). See note to editors for definitions.

The implementation of the final elements of the Basel III minimum requirements began on 1 January 2023. At the end of the second half of 2024, the average impact of the fully phased-in final Basel III framework on the Tier 1 minimum required capital (MRC) of Group 1 banks was +2.1%, compared with +1.8% at end-June 2024. Group 1 banks report no regulatory capital shortfall, compared with €0.9 billion at end-June 2024.

The monitoring exercise also collected bank data on Basel III liquidity requirements. The weighted average Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) decreased compared with the previous reporting period to 134.8% for Group 1 banks. Three Group 1 banks reported an LCR below the minimum requirement of 100%.

The weighted average NSFR was stable at 123.7% for Group 1 banks. All banks reported an NSFR above the minimum requirement of 100%.

The report is accompanied by interactive Tableau dashboards, offering users an intuitive way to explore results. New features enhance usability, while expanded explanatory text provides deeper insights into topics such as risk-based capital and operational risk. For the first time, users can also download the underlying data directly from the dashboards.

---

Note to editors

Through a rigorous reporting process, the Basel Committee regularly reviews the implications of the Basel III standards for banks and has been publishing the results of such exercises since 2012.

The results shown for “current Basel III framework” reflect the current jurisdictional standards that apply to the reporting banks as of 31 December 2024, which reflect different degrees of implementation of the Basel III reforms. The Basel III implementation dashboard provides an overview of Basel III implementation status across jurisdictions. The results shown for “fully phased-in final Basel III framework (2028)” assume that the positions as of 31 December 2024 were subject to the full application of the Basel III standards. That is, they do not account for transitional arrangements set out in the Basel III framework, which expire on 1 January 2028. No assumptions were made about bank profitability or behavioural responses, such as changes in bank capital or balance sheet composition. For that reason, the results of the study may not be comparable with industry estimates.

Data are provided for 176 banks, including 116 large internationally active banks. These “Group 1” banks are defined as internationally active banks that have Tier 1 capital of more than €3 billion and include 29 institutions that have been designated as global systemically important banks (G-SIBs). The Basel Committee’s sample also includes 59 “Group 2” banks (ie banks that have Tier 1 capital of less than €3 billion or are not internationally active).

The values for the previous period may differ slightly from those published in the previous report. This is caused by data resubmissions for previous periods to improve the underlying data quality and enlarge the time series sample.

In 2024, labour market slack in the EU accounted for 11.7% of the extended labour force, representing 26.7 million people aged 15 to 74 available for work but not participating in the labour market to their potential. This included unemployed and underemployed people, those seeking a job even though they are not immediately available to work and those immediately available to work but not seeking a job. With minor fluctuations, labour market slack in the EU has been decreasing over the decade, falling from 18.6% in 2015.

Among EU countries, Spain recorded the highest labour market slack in 2024 (19.3% of the extended labour force), followed by Finland (17.9%) and Sweden (17.8%)

In contrast, labour market slack was the lowest in Poland (5.0%), Malta (5.1%) and Slovenia and Hungary (both 6.3%).

Source dataset: lfsi_sla_a

Unemployment: the largest part of labour market slack

A detailed breakdown of labour market slack shows that 5.7% of the extended labour force was unemployed, 2.7% was available to work but not seeking employment, 2.4% of people were underemployed part-time workers and 0.9% were seeking employment but not immediately available to work.

Unemployed people made up most of the labour market slack in 23 EU countries, with the highest shares in Spain (10.9%), Greece (9.9%), Finland and Sweden (7.9% each). 

However, there were some exceptions. In Ireland and the Netherlands, the majority of slack came from underemployed people working part-time (4.4% and 4.9%, respectively). In Czechia, the highest share was among people seeking work but not immediately available to start (3.1%), while in Italy, most were available to work but not seeking employment (7.3%).

Source dataset: lfsi_sla_a

England’s water company ratings have fallen to the lowest level on record after sewage pollution last year rose to a new peak, with eight of nine water companies rated as poor and needing improvement by the Environment Agency.

The cumulative score of just 19 stars out of a possible 36 is the lowest since the regulator began auditing the companies using the star rating system in 2011.

Only one water company, Severn Trent, achieved full marks. The company did so despite having presided over 62,085 sewage spills, averaging seven hours each, in 2024.

Struggling Thames Water was the only company to be awarded just one star for its performance. In 2023-24, its serious sewage pollution incidents more than doubled from 14 to 33.

Thames is on the brink of collapse as the company struggles to secure a deal to write off its debt and secure its future. It has been crippled by huge debts built up over two decades by owners who have been criticised for paying out dividends without investing enough in its leaking pipes and malfunctioning treatment works.

The report blames the wet and stormy weather in 2024, underinvestment and poor maintenance of infrastructure, and also increased monitoring and inspection, for the decrease in performance.

Ofwat’s performance report was also published on Thursday and the regulator found pollution incidents remained at unacceptable levels, with only two companies having reported a reduction in incidents over the five-year period.

It found that so far during the 2020-25 period, water companies had increased the amount of sewage spilled despite having promised to cut it by 30%.

The report says: “Companies committed to reduce pollution incidents by 30% in the 2020-25 period. Companies achieved a reduction of 15% in the first three years, but the increase in the final two years has led to an overall 27% increase in numbers across the 2020-25 period.”

The Environment Agency’s ratings have been criticised as not fit for purpose by pollution experts because they allow top marks to be awarded to companies that illegally spill sewage.

Bosses presiding over companies found to “recklessly” discharge sewage have been able to justify their large pay packets because of being awarded the top rating, while companies that preside over sewage spills can call themselves “industry leaders”.

From 2027 the Environment Agency will introduce new ratings, replacing the star system with a descriptor and number rating.

At present, companies are given one to four stars. As part of the new methodology, they will instead be given a numeric rating from one to five, with only those that achieve the highest standards across the board rated “excellent” and the worst performers rated as “failing”.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

The Environment Agency chair, Alan Lovell, said: “This year’s results are poor and must serve as a clear and urgent signal for change. What is needed now from every water company is bold leadership, a shift in mindset and a relentless focus on delivery. We will support them however we can but will continue to robustly challenge them when they fall short.”

Companies are judged on seven metrics, including drought resilience and transparency over sewage spills. If they score highly on some of these, they can get top marks even if they have discharged large amounts of untreated waste into England’s rivers and seas.

Severn Trent has used the company’s four-star rating to justify the pay packet and bonus of its chief executive. Last year, Liv Garfield was awarded a £3.2m pay deal, including a £584,000 bonus, despite the company being fined £2m for spilling 260m litres of sewage into the River Trent.

This week the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, told regulators to focus on helping businesses achieve economic growth rather than enforcing regulations. She announced that the government would set growth targets and publish a league table.

The government plans to overhaul regulation by abolishing Ofwat and creating a “super regulator” by merging the powers of the existing bodies.

Campaigners have questioned how effective this will be, as the privatised water system has allowed large bonuses and dividends to be paid by water companies at the expense of investment in sewage infrastructure. This has led to increasing sewage pollution into England’s rivers and seas.