Solvency Ratio Maturity · WAEMU Prudential Framework
Your WAEMU solvency framework, measured level by level and turned into a costed action plan.
10 themes, a 5-level scale. And the action that moves each level to the next.
The framework’s 10 themes, already written from L1 to L5. One company, one business unit, or 300 at once.
Solvency Ratio Maturity · WAEMU Prudential Framework
10 themes, 5-level scale.
Nordhavn Industries
53 / 100
They measure their maturity with Datamensio
An example
This could be your situation.
Take one company as an example: three sites, three spreadsheets, no shared answer.
Nobody can consolidate.
Nordhavn Industries, 2,400 people in Hamburg, Lyon and Porto. A client asks where the group stands. Each site answers in its own spreadsheet, with its own scales.
Three weeks, a single base.
One Prudential framework applicable to credit institutions and financial companies of the WAMU (BCEAO, in force since 1 January 2018) assessment launched across all three sites at once, from the managers’ interview notes. The framework was already written, its 10 themes and levels L1 to L5 too.
Two costs avoided before being committed.
A score of 53 out of 100, with the gap concentrated on three themes. The AI companion spotted that two actions duplicated those of another audit. The committee report took one sentence to request.
What it saved them
- 3sites measured on the same base, instead of three questionnaires to reconcile
- 2duplicate actions caught before the spend
- 1committee report, with no manual rework
These figures are an example. They could be yours.
The standard imposes processes. Datamensio says where you stand.
01
The framework is already written
Themes, questions and levels L1 to L5, all written. You do not start from an empty spreadsheet.
02
The score lands the same day
Online, by self-assessment link or in interview. Theme by theme, comparable over time.
03
The gap becomes a costed plan
Every step up carries its action. The AI prioritises on expected effect, not on the order of the standard.
04
Progress can be demonstrated
Campaign after campaign, against your target and against your own past. That is what your board asks for.
The maturity scale
One level, the next, and the action that links the two.
It is this mechanism, one level, the level above, and the action linking the two, that turns an observation into a trajectory.
Is the capital trajectory projected and used in the institution’s decisions?
- N1
No projection exists. The ratio is only known after the fact, when regulatory returns are produced.
- N2
A projection exists, produced once a year in a file maintained by one person, with no formal link to the budget.
- N3
The projection is updated on a defined schedule, built into the budget and presented to the risk committee. Assumptions are documented.
- N4
The projection includes stress scenarios and internal alert thresholds. Growth and distribution decisions are assessed against their effect on the buffer.
- N5
Assumptions and scenarios are revised based on gaps observed between projection and actuals, with documented tracking of revisions and a tested capital restoration plan.
Action to move from L2 to L3
Tie the capital projection to the budget calendar, formalise the assumptions on risk weighted asset growth and results, and put a review of the trajectory on the risk committee’s agenda every quarter.
« With Datamensio, we meet our objectives far more efficiently. The ERDF inspection services and our supervising ministry particularly appreciated an approach that gives them reliable data. »
Director, CCI 94CCI Île-de-France
« We believe this is the most suitable solution to scale our transformation project and measure impact according to our needs. »
Maja SucekChief Operating Officer, Interreg Danube
Rarely on its own
Frameworks combine. Put several together to cover your business, or have the AI write yours.
Take your first measurement
What this framework covers
The prudential framework applicable to credit institutions and financial companies of the WAMU, in force since 1 January 2018, transposes the principles of Basel II and Basel III to the Union context. It defines three categories of own funds, Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1), Additional Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital, together with the applicable deductions. It imposes a total capital ratio, supplemented by a conservation buffer, and covers credit risk, operational risk and market risk. The leverage ratio and pillar 2 requirements complete the set.
In practice, this framework is hard to manage because it rests on a long chain, running from the management information system through to the regulatory return submitted to the Banking Commission. Are credit risk weightings applied from reliable, up to date collateral data, or rebuilt by hand at the end of each quarter? Is the ratio calculation rerun during the period, or only discovered at reporting time? Is the effect of a major lending transaction or a dividend distribution on the buffer level simulated before the decision, or observed after the fact?
A confusion recurs frequently: the solvency ratio and the ICAAP do not measure the same thing. The former is a minimum requirement calculated according to uniform rules set by the BCEAO. The latter is the institution’s own internal assessment of the capital it needs given its specific risk profile, including risks that pillar 1 does not cover. An institution can meet the regulatory standard while having a poorly structured internal capital planning process. The gradual phasing in of buffers and the supervisor’s growing attention to the quality of own funds make this gap more visible.
A prudential compliance audit concludes with a pass or a breach of threshold at a given date. The maturity assessment asks a different question: what level of control does the framework producing this ratio actually operate at, from data quality through to the governance of capital decisions, and what specific action moves it up a level. This is the lens that allows subsidiaries to be compared, a trajectory to be tracked over time, and investment decisions to be made.
In Datamensio, the framework is ready to use and remains fully editable. The AI adjusts the themes, questions and levels to your organisation, be it a universal bank, a bank-type financial institution or a parent financial company, or builds a variant from your own procedures and regulatory returns.
Reference standard: Prudential framework applicable to credit institutions and financial companies of the WAMU (BCEAO, in force since 1 January 2018)
The themes assessed
Composition and quality of own funds
Classification into CET1, AT1 and T2, instrument eligibility, treatment of reserves and interim results, regulatory deductions, prudential filters.
Credit risk measurement
Application of weightings by counterparty category, treatment of collateral and mitigation techniques, off balance sheet items and conversion factors, sovereign exposures.
Operational risk and market risk
Method used to calculate the operational risk requirement, scope of net banking income used, foreign exchange and interest rate positions, treatment of the trading book.
Data quality and calculation chain
Data origin, balance sheet and return consistency checks, management of manual adjustments, audit trail, calculation rerun and archiving.
Buffers and threshold compliance
Monitoring of the conservation buffer, margin against minimum requirements, alert mechanism as thresholds are approached, associated distribution restrictions.
Capital planning
Projection of own funds and risk weighted assets, stress simulations and scenarios, alignment with the budget and business plan, capital restoration plan.
Governance of capital decisions
Role of the board and committees, formalised solvency risk appetite, internal alert thresholds above the regulatory minimum, traceability of decisions.
Prudential reporting and relationship with the supervisor
Meeting reporting deadlines, consistency between regulatory returns and accounts, handling of Banking Commission requests and observations, follow up on recommendations.
Consolidation and group scope
Determination of the prudential scope, treatment of holdings and subsidiaries, data flow from entities, consistency of methods across the Union’s countries.
Control and independent review
Second level control over the calculation, internal audit review, statutory auditor involvement, follow up on identified anomalies and their correction.
A short version of the framework is available for the online self-assessment.
Frequently asked questions
Does this assessment replace the Banking Commission’s inspection?
No. Prudential inspection checks compliance with thresholds and the accuracy of returns, and is the supervisor’s role. The assessment measures the maturity of the framework producing the ratio and prepares the discussion with the supervisor. Datamensio issues no attestation.
What is the difference between a maturity assessment and a prudential compliance audit?
The audit concludes with a pass or a threshold breach at a given date. The assessment places each practice on a progressive scale and identifies the action that moves it to the next level. The two are complementary: the assessment prepares, the audit validates.
How long does the assessment take?
The short version can be completed in a single sitting by a risk or permanent control manager. The full version, in collaborative mode, takes one to two weeks, most of the time spent gathering input from finance, risk and IT teams.
Can the framework be adapted to our institution?
Yes. Questions, levels and themes can all be edited, and the AI builds a variant from your internal procedures or regulatory returns. A bank-type financial institution does not have the same calculation chain as a universal bank.
How can several subsidiaries in the Union be compared?
Each entity is assessed against the same framework, making scores comparable by theme. The benchmark positions business units against each other and against their previous assessments. A cross-entity roadmap consolidates the action plans of the different entities.
Does the assessment also cover the ICAAP?
The framework covers capital planning and the governance of related decisions, which overlap with the ICAAP without replacing it. A dedicated framework on capital adequacy exists in the catalogue, and the cross-entity roadmap allows the two to be cross-referenced without duplicating actions.
Do respondents need modelling expertise?
The questions focus on management, control and governance practices, not on the configuration of calculation engines. Some require input from an IT contact: collaborative mode allows these questions to be assigned to the right person.
Where is the data hosted?
In France, with OVH, backed up at Scaleway. No transfer outside the European Union. The AI models used can be selected, including from European solutions.