Regulatory bodies in the US, EU, and UK have announced their respective strategies for stress testing banks. These tests are designed to assess the resilience of financial institutions under adverse economic conditions.

In the United States, the Federal Reserve (FED) utilizes the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) process. This involves quantitative assessments of capital ratios and qualitative assessments of capital planning and risk management frameworks. The FED plans to test 22 banks this year using two hypothetical scenarios: baseline and severely adverse. "One of these elements examines how banks would react to credit and liquidity shocks in the non-bank financial institution sector during a severe global recession," according to recent updates. Another element includes a market shock that will be applied only to the largest and most complex banks.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also conducts stress tests, aligning its methodologies with those of the FED. It provides supervisory guidance on stress testing and risk management practices.

In Europe, the European Banking Authority (EBA) coordinates EU-wide stress tests using a "bottom-up" approach with some top-down elements. The EBA's 2025 exercise addresses macroeconomic shocks, geopolitical risks, and interest rate volatility through baseline and adverse scenarios. Public disclosure of results is a key feature.

The European Central Bank (ECB), supervising significant Eurozone banks, conducts parallel stress tests influencing supervisory decisions through the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP). This year, it examines 51 major euro area banks along with additional medium-sized institutions not included in EBA's sample.

The Bank of England (BoE) has updated its approach but has yet to issue specific scenarios for its next round of stress testing. Its strategy combines regular stress testing with adaptable methods for exploring different risks over recent years.

These regulators aim to ensure financial stability while reflecting their unique regulatory mandates and priorities. As new global economic challenges arise, ongoing dialogue among these bodies remains crucial for maintaining a resilient financial system.