WHATX/ESG_Report · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 7.73k
We conceptualized a company-/asset-level sustainability and climate risk scorecard (i.e., a climate and environmental risk rating addressing transition risk, physical risk and nature-related risk) at the level of counterparties and assets (e.g., issuers and real estate collateral, amongst other types). To enable implementation, we further enhanced methodologies for climate risk drivers and began a firm-wide development of supporting IT infrastructure, data process modeling, prototyping with select and material portfolios, and business process integration.
We also identified new climate risks for Personal & Corporate Banking’s cash-flow-based lending and the Investment Bank’s commercial lending portfolios and modelled additional non-realized credit losses of a minor scale associated with the impact of climate change and climate change policy. By expanding the climate risk heatmap methodology to cover traded products, issuer risk and collateral we identified potential concentrations of climate risk on a broader scope of our firm’s balance sheet. We systematically monitored climate-sensitive sectors for the potential increase of exposure to sectors that may be prone to higher default rates and/or devaluation.
In line with the risk appetite set by our Board of Directors (the BoD) pertaining to net zero, we established a quantified risk appetite in key sectors, achieved with a novel carbon budgeting and utilization methodology. The risk appetite was syndicated with the Chief Risk Officers (CROs) of Personal & Corporate Banking and the Investment Bank and ratified by the Group Executive Board (the GEB) for implementation in 2023.
Market risk (traded and non-traded) A working group of cross-divisional market risk experts is developing methodologies to assess potential for concentration of climate-related market risks and examining our firm’s assumptions on market risk correlations and liquidity. We conducted an initial analysis to assess the sensitivity of industry sectors in our firm’s balance sheet to transition risk, which helped define data-sourcing requirements vis-à-vis market risk infrastructure. Issuer and methodological coverage of a range of external ESG data providers has been analyzed in relation to climate-related market risk transmission channels. In addition, we gave market-risk-relevant design input for internal baseline and adverse climate stress scenarios. This included a 2023 plan to design instantaneous shocks for market-risk-relevant stress of our firm’s balance sheet while accounting for structural product considerations and time horizons.
Non-financial risk We enhanced the Group-wide regulatory tracking process to incorporate relevant coverage for sustainability- and climate-related changes to laws, rules and regulations across global jurisdictions. Sustainable product guidelines (for bonds, lending and investments) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading guidelines were provided for implementation in 2023. We also implemented new environmental crimes dimensions in the financial crime prevention (FCP) country risk model, which feeds into processes such as client risk rating and risk appetite monitoring. Updates to our New Business Initiative process included ESG / sustainable investing product considerations in business submission and associated control function assessments. Additionally, we assessed the impact from climate-related operational disruptions (e.g., physical climate disruptions) into our business continuity management (BCM) and operational resilience framework.
Reputational risk We assessed the design of the reputational risk framework to be generally robust in terms of roles and responsibilities, escalation requirements, as well as review and approval authorities for sustainability-related risks. The reputational risk dashboard now captures the key risk indicators on a quarterly basis including Financial Crime Prevention, Sustainability and Climate Risks, Client Complaints, New Business, Reputational Risk Cases metrics.
43


Sustainability Report 2022 \| Environment 44.
ESG data To support the SCR initiative’s efforts on risk management adaptation, and the firm’s broader business interests in sustainable products and services, we established a centralized governance and related process for ESG data procurement and management. A newly formed team is mandated to ensure consistency and controlled deployment throughout the Group. To support these efforts, the SCR initiative managed the comprehensive range of ESG data requirements across risk methodology. We did this by engaging relevant model owners and vetting data providers against a rigorous rubric and were therefore able to reduce redundancies and streamline inputs for credit, market, treasury, and liquidity risk stress models. This effort culminated with most major data providers coming online towards the end of 2022, with some procurement processes in late-stage sign-offs.
Sustainability and climate risk identification and measurement.
UBS considers sustainability and climate-driven risk drivers from changing climate and/or environmental conditions (physical and/or nature-related risks). These risk drivers expose banks and the broader financial system to climate and environmental change through both micro- and macroeconomic transmission channels.
By combining expert and industry-based views of how sustainability and climate risks may transmit into financial (e.g., credit losses) and non-financial impacts (e.g., operational disruptions), and with UBS-specific product information, we developed an in-house materiality-driven approach to climate risk identification and applied it across all products, services and operations.
On an annual basis, our SCR unit coordinates and updates a systematic materiality assessment of sustainability and climate-driven risks, in accordance with the ISO 14001 standard. In 2022, our SCR unit further advanced the materiality assessment methodology, leveraging internal and external expert guidance (e.g., by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision). The assessment was designed to include climate and nature-related risk considerations, incorporate quantitative measurements (e.g., heatmap outcomes), and adapt to transmission channels identified as of December 2022. This includes income and wealth impacts on our own assets and/or counterparties, such as households, corporate clients or sovereign clients, subsequently affecting their value and/or creditworthiness; and science- and business-based ratings of transition, physical, and nature-related risks (e.g., climate-risk-driven scoring of our own assets and counterparties and heatmapping). › Refer to the “Appendix 1 – Strategy” section of this report for details about our climate-related materiality assessment.
UBS approaches climate risk identification by integrating climate risk drivers, expert-based views on their transmission channels, and climate risk methodologies (e.g., risk scores and heatmaps). This enables a materiality-driven approach to climate risk management.
We aim to systematically identify sustainability and climate risks at divisional and cross-divisional levels, both through the sustainability and climate risk-driven materiality assessment described above, and increasingly through their integration into the firm-wide traditional risk identification process. This is also applied to significant Group entities under UBS Group AG. These climate risk methodologies help us take a materiality-driven approach, directly structuring our climate risk management strategy by: – identifying concentrations of climate-sensitive exposure that have higher than average vulnerability to climate risk drivers; – allowing UBS to prioritize resources with respect to detailed risk analysis and management actions; – supporting the delivery of a client-centric business strategy where our firm supports clients with climate transition (i.e., adaptive) finance, identifying clients that could benefit from related UBS products and services; and – providing information to senior management to support decision making at all stages of credit granting, market making, and investment selection processes, along with decision-useful information in our external disclosures to stakeholders.
44


Sustainability Report 2022 \| Environment 45.
Transition risk heatmap Transition risk covers the adjustment to an environmentally sustainable economy, including changes in public policies, disruptive technological developments and shifts in consumer and investor preferences.
Our transition risk heatmap methodology is based on a risk-segmentation process, dividing and rating economic sectors and industry sub-segments that share similar risk vulnerability characteristics.
These are then scored and rated according to their vulnerability to climate policy, low-carbon technology risks and revenue or demand shifts under an immediate and ambitious approach to meeting the well-below-2˚C Paris goal. We are able to use these risk ratings to support identification of potential climate-sensitive concentrations. The ratings in the heatmap are bands of scores (from 0 to 1), and reflect the levels of risk that would likely occur under an ambitious transition (in a short-term time horizon).
The current transition risk heatmap shows that our exposure to activities rated as having high, moderately high or moderate vulnerability to climate transition risks is relatively low (as a percentage, in 2022 compared with 2021). Most year-on-year fluctuations (2021 to 2022) were in the energy sector, specifically in oil and gas midstream and downstream segments, caused by rising energy prices, as the Russia–Ukraine war tightened global energy supply. Despite these fluctuations, we have continued to reduce our exposure to climate-sensitive sectors.
45


Climate risk heatmap (transition risk)1,2.
In USD billion 80.19 Moderately low 332.28 Low 12.82 Not classifi ed 450.17 3,4.
Total exposure.
High.
Shale gas Refi ning and marketing.
Fossil fuels.
Moderate 4.91.
Real estate 4.55.
Fossil fuels 2.86.
Industrials 2.80.
Metals and mining 3.15.
Transportation 1.40.
Agriculture 0.10.
Utilities.
Moderately high 5.08 3.43.
Industrials 1.12.
Fossil fuels 0.51.
Utilities 0.01.
Agriculture 0.02.
Real estate.
Wholesale/trade: refi ned petroleum products.
Downstream oil and gas distribution.
Transportation and storage (gas)
Fossil fuels.
Machinery and related parts manufacturing.
Consumer durables manufacturing.
Industrials.
Plastics and petrochemicals manufacture.
Construction of buildings and related activities.
Commercial real estate.
Real estate.
Transportation Airlines – cargo.
Transportation parts and equipment supply.
Land-based shipping (trucks)
Autos, high-carbon (few EVs, many SUVs)
Sea-based shipping, high-carbon.
Airlines – commercial 4.70 0.21 0.00 2.62 1.00 0.93 1.76 1.39 1.70 0.49 0.48 0.10 0.06 0.02.
Conglomerates (incl. trading)
Production of other mined metals and raw materials.
Metals and mining.
Production of steel/iron 2.44 0.26 0.09.
Agriculture.
Food and beverage production 1.40.
Utilities.
Wastewater treatment.
Electricity from moderate-carbon fuels (regulated) 0.08 0.02.
Pharmaceuticals.
Chemicals.
Cement or concrete manufacture.
Industrials 1.90 1.02 0.51.
Fossil fuels.
Wholesale/ trade: crude oil and natural gas.
Integrated oil and gas.
Conventional oil (on- / offshore)
Gas processing (incl. LNG) 0.54 0.40 0.11 0.08.
Utilities Electricity from high-carbon fuels (regulated) 0.51.
Commercial real estate.
Real estate 0.02.
Livestock – beef extensive grazing.
Agriculture 0.01.
Consists of total loans and advances to customers and guarantees, as well as irrevocable loan commitments (within the scope of expected credit loss), and are based on consolidated and standalone IFRS numbers. Climate-related risks are scored between 0 and 1, based upon sustainability and climate risk transmission channels, as outlined in the Methodology Appendix. Risk ratings represent a range of scores across, 5 risk rating categories: low, moderately low, moderate, moderately high, and high. Climate-sensitive exposure metric is determined based upon the top 3 out of 5 rated categories: high to moderate. Sectors, such as fossil fuels, are further segmented to categories refl ecting a range of risk vulnerabilities from high to moderate, within the sensitive sector. Total exposure calculation is subject to rounding to two decimal places, hence potential deviation from actual. Methodologies for assessing climate-related risks are emerging and may change over time. As the methodologies, tools, and data availability improve, we will further develop our risk identifi cation and measurement approaches, including updated geospatial analysis of properties securing fi nancing with UBS (real estate) and better understanding how private lending (e.g., Lombard) activities may result in direct fi nancial impacts to UBS. Not classifi ed represents portion of UBS business activities where methodologies and data are not yet able to provide a rating. Lombard lending rating is assigned based on the average riskiness of loans.
1 2 3 4 19.77 0.02 0.02 0.00 47


Sustainability Report 2022 \| Environment 48.
Physical risk heatmap Physical risk arises from the impact of weather events and long-term or widespread environmental changes.
Our physical risk heatmap methodology groups corporate counterparties based on exposure to key physical risk factors, by rating sectoral (sectoral average risk distribution), geographic (vulnerability and adaptive capacity) and value chain (sectoral average risk distribution) vulnerabilities in a climate change trajectory, in which no additional policy action is taken. These are then scored for the potential for financial loss in the short-term time horizon.
Ratings from low to high are based on a weighted average score (from 0 to 1), given by double-weighting sector and geography, and single-weighting value chain. Scores are given by the following inputs: – the counterparty’s sectoral activity (e.g., primary energy extraction presents higher physical risks than banks due to its average geographic footprint and vulnerability to financial losses in the short term from physical risk hazards); – the counterparty’s geographical location (e.g., countries in Southeast Asia tend to be higher risk than those in Western Europe, with some exceptions reflecting the potential for national economic resilience and subsidy to economic activities threatened by climate change); and – the potential disruption to a counterparty’s value chain, where relevant, (both its supply chain and distribution channels again reflecting the sectoral average geographic footprint and vulnerability).
We will continue to enhance our methodology in 2023, with relevant subject matter experts (e.g., country risk experts) and enhanced vendor data sources (e.g., systematic integration of geospatial tools and data).
Our current physical risk heatmap shows that we have relatively low exposure to activities rated as having high, moderately high or moderate vulnerability to physical climate risks. Key concentrations of exposure include high volumes of real estate lending in Switzerland. Most of our lending is to the financial sector, which by its nature has a lower physical climate risk. Key exceptions are lending to property insurance companies or lending in higher-risk regions, such as South Asia.
The chart below shows the location-specific risk distribution compared with the spread of physical risk across sectoral risk ratings versus country (risk domicile, see above) risk ratings. The size of the circle indicates the relative lending exposure.
48

We conceptualized a company-/asset-level sustainability and climate risk scorecard (i.e., a climate and environmental risk rating addressing transition risk, physical risk and nature-related risk) at the level of counterparties and assets (e.g., issuers and real estate collateral, amongst other types). To enable implementation, we further enhanced methodologies for climate risk drivers and began a firm-wide development of supporting IT infrastructure, data process modeling, prototyping with select and material portfolios, and business process integration.

We also identified new climate risks for Personal & Corporate Banking’s cash-flow-based lending and the Investment Bank’s commercial lending portfolios and modelled additional non-realized credit losses of a minor scale associated with the impact of climate change and climate change policy. By expanding the climate risk heatmap methodology to cover traded products, issuer risk and collateral we identified potential concentrations of climate risk on a broader scope of our firm’s balance sheet. We systematically monitored climate-sensitive sectors for the potential increase of exposure to sectors that may be prone to higher default rates and/or devaluation.

In line with the risk appetite set by our Board of Directors (the BoD) pertaining to net zero, we established a quantified risk appetite in key sectors, achieved with a novel carbon budgeting and utilization methodology. The risk appetite was syndicated with the Chief Risk Officers (CROs) of Personal & Corporate Banking and the Investment Bank and ratified by the Group Executive Board (the GEB) for implementation in 2023.

Market risk (traded and non-traded) A working group of cross-divisional market risk experts is developing methodologies to assess potential for concentration of climate-related market risks and examining our firm’s assumptions on market risk correlations and liquidity. We conducted an initial analysis to assess the sensitivity of industry sectors in our firm’s balance sheet to transition risk, which helped define data-sourcing requirements vis-à-vis market risk infrastructure. Issuer and methodological coverage of a range of external ESG data providers has been analyzed in relation to climate-related market risk transmission channels. In addition, we gave market-risk-relevant design input for internal baseline and adverse climate stress scenarios. This included a 2023 plan to design instantaneous shocks for market-risk-relevant stress of our firm’s balance sheet while accounting for structural product considerations and time horizons.

Non-financial risk We enhanced the Group-wide regulatory tracking process to incorporate relevant coverage for sustainability- and climate-related changes to laws, rules and regulations across global jurisdictions. Sustainable product guidelines (for bonds, lending and investments) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading guidelines were provided for implementation in 2023. We also implemented new environmental crimes dimensions in the financial crime prevention (FCP) country risk model, which feeds into processes such as client risk rating and risk appetite monitoring. Updates to our New Business Initiative process included ESG / sustainable investing product considerations in business submission and associated control function assessments. Additionally, we assessed the impact from climate-related operational disruptions (e.g., physical climate disruptions) into our business continuity management (BCM) and operational resilience framework.

Reputational risk We assessed the design of the reputational risk framework to be generally robust in terms of roles and responsibilities, escalation requirements, as well as review and approval authorities for sustainability-related risks. The reputational risk dashboard now captures the key risk indicators on a quarterly basis including Financial Crime Prevention, Sustainability and Climate Risks, Client Complaints, New Business, Reputational Risk Cases metrics.

43

Sustainability Report 2022 | Environment 44.

ESG data To support the SCR initiative’s efforts on risk management adaptation, and the firm’s broader business interests in sustainable products and services, we established a centralized governance and related process for ESG data procurement and management. A newly formed team is mandated to ensure consistency and controlled deployment throughout the Group. To support these efforts, the SCR initiative managed the comprehensive range of ESG data requirements across risk methodology. We did this by engaging relevant model owners and vetting data providers against a rigorous rubric and were therefore able to reduce redundancies and streamline inputs for credit, market, treasury, and liquidity risk stress models. This effort culminated with most major data providers coming online towards the end of 2022, with some procurement processes in late-stage sign-offs.

Sustainability and climate risk identification and measurement.

UBS considers sustainability and climate-driven risk drivers from changing climate and/or environmental conditions (physical and/or nature-related risks). These risk drivers expose banks and the broader financial system to climate and environmental change through both micro- and macroeconomic transmission channels.

By combining expert and industry-based views of how sustainability and climate risks may transmit into financial (e.g., credit losses) and non-financial impacts (e.g., operational disruptions), and with UBS-specific product information, we developed an in-house materiality-driven approach to climate risk identification and applied it across all products, services and operations.

On an annual basis, our SCR unit coordinates and updates a systematic materiality assessment of sustainability and climate-driven risks, in accordance with the ISO 14001 standard. In 2022, our SCR unit further advanced the materiality assessment methodology, leveraging internal and external expert guidance (e.g., by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision). The assessment was designed to include climate and nature-related risk considerations, incorporate quantitative measurements (e.g., heatmap outcomes), and adapt to transmission channels identified as of December 2022. This includes income and wealth impacts on our own assets and/or counterparties, such as households, corporate clients or sovereign clients, subsequently affecting their value and/or creditworthiness; and science- and business-based ratings of transition, physical, and nature-related risks (e.g., climate-risk-driven scoring of our own assets and counterparties and heatmapping). › Refer to the “Appendix 1 – Strategy” section of this report for details about our climate-related materiality assessment.

UBS approaches climate risk identification by integrating climate risk drivers, expert-based views on their transmission channels, and climate risk methodologies (e.g., risk scores and heatmaps). This enables a materiality-driven approach to climate risk management.

We aim to systematically identify sustainability and climate risks at divisional and cross-divisional levels, both through the sustainability and climate risk-driven materiality assessment described above, and increasingly through their integration into the firm-wide traditional risk identification process. This is also applied to significant Group entities under UBS Group AG. These climate risk methodologies help us take a materiality-driven approach, directly structuring our climate risk management strategy by: – identifying concentrations of climate-sensitive exposure that have higher than average vulnerability to climate risk drivers; – allowing UBS to prioritize resources with respect to detailed risk analysis and management actions; – supporting the delivery of a client-centric business strategy where our firm supports clients with climate transition (i.e., adaptive) finance, identifying clients that could benefit from related UBS products and services; and – providing information to senior management to support decision making at all stages of credit granting, market making, and investment selection processes, along with decision-useful information in our external disclosures to stakeholders.

44

Sustainability Report 2022 | Environment 45.

Transition risk heatmap Transition risk covers the adjustment to an environmentally sustainable economy, including changes in public policies, disruptive technological developments and shifts in consumer and investor preferences.

Our transition risk heatmap methodology is based on a risk-segmentation process, dividing and rating economic sectors and industry sub-segments that share similar risk vulnerability characteristics.

These are then scored and rated according to their vulnerability to climate policy, low-carbon technology risks and revenue or demand shifts under an immediate and ambitious approach to meeting the well-below-2˚C Paris goal. We are able to use these risk ratings to support identification of potential climate-sensitive concentrations. The ratings in the heatmap are bands of scores (from 0 to 1), and reflect the levels of risk that would likely occur under an ambitious transition (in a short-term time horizon).

The current transition risk heatmap shows that our exposure to activities rated as having high, moderately high or moderate vulnerability to climate transition risks is relatively low (as a percentage, in 2022 compared with 2021). Most year-on-year fluctuations (2021 to 2022) were in the energy sector, specifically in oil and gas midstream and downstream segments, caused by rising energy prices, as the Russia–Ukraine war tightened global energy supply. Despite these fluctuations, we have continued to reduce our exposure to climate-sensitive sectors.

45

Climate risk heatmap (transition risk)1,2.

In USD billion 80.19 Moderately low 332.28 Low 12.82 Not classifi ed 450.17 3,4.

Total exposure.

High.

Shale gas Refi ning and marketing.

Fossil fuels.

Moderate 4.91.

Real estate 4.55.

Fossil fuels 2.86.

Industrials 2.80.

Metals and mining 3.15.

Transportation 1.40.

Agriculture 0.10.

Utilities.

Moderately high 5.08 3.43.

Industrials 1.12.

Fossil fuels 0.51.

Utilities 0.01.

Agriculture 0.02.

Real estate.

Wholesale/trade: refi ned petroleum products.

Downstream oil and gas distribution.

Transportation and storage (gas)

Fossil fuels.

Machinery and related parts manufacturing.

Consumer durables manufacturing.

Industrials.

Plastics and petrochemicals manufacture.

Construction of buildings and related activities.

Commercial real estate.

Real estate.

Transportation Airlines – cargo.

Transportation parts and equipment supply.

Land-based shipping (trucks)

Autos, high-carbon (few EVs, many SUVs)

Sea-based shipping, high-carbon.

Airlines – commercial 4.70 0.21 0.00 2.62 1.00 0.93 1.76 1.39 1.70 0.49 0.48 0.10 0.06 0.02.

Conglomerates (incl. trading)

Production of other mined metals and raw materials.

Metals and mining.

Production of steel/iron 2.44 0.26 0.09.

Agriculture.

Food and beverage production 1.40.

Utilities.

Wastewater treatment.

Electricity from moderate-carbon fuels (regulated) 0.08 0.02.

Pharmaceuticals.

Chemicals.

Cement or concrete manufacture.

Industrials 1.90 1.02 0.51.

Fossil fuels.

Wholesale/ trade: crude oil and natural gas.

Integrated oil and gas.

Conventional oil (on- / offshore)

Gas processing (incl. LNG) 0.54 0.40 0.11 0.08.

Utilities Electricity from high-carbon fuels (regulated) 0.51.

Commercial real estate.

Real estate 0.02.

Livestock – beef extensive grazing.

Agriculture 0.01.

Consists of total loans and advances to customers and guarantees, as well as irrevocable loan commitments (within the scope of expected credit loss), and are based on consolidated and standalone IFRS numbers. Climate-related risks are scored between 0 and 1, based upon sustainability and climate risk transmission channels, as outlined in the Methodology Appendix. Risk ratings represent a range of scores across, 5 risk rating categories: low, moderately low, moderate, moderately high, and high. Climate-sensitive exposure metric is determined based upon the top 3 out of 5 rated categories: high to moderate. Sectors, such as fossil fuels, are further segmented to categories refl ecting a range of risk vulnerabilities from high to moderate, within the sensitive sector. Total exposure calculation is subject to rounding to two decimal places, hence potential deviation from actual. Methodologies for assessing climate-related risks are emerging and may change over time. As the methodologies, tools, and data availability improve, we will further develop our risk identifi cation and measurement approaches, including updated geospatial analysis of properties securing fi nancing with UBS (real estate) and better understanding how private lending (e.g., Lombard) activities may result in direct fi nancial impacts to UBS. Not classifi ed represents portion of UBS business activities where methodologies and data are not yet able to provide a rating. Lombard lending rating is assigned based on the average riskiness of loans.

1 2 3 4 19.77 0.02 0.02 0.00 47

Sustainability Report 2022 | Environment 48.

Physical risk heatmap Physical risk arises from the impact of weather events and long-term or widespread environmental changes.

Our physical risk heatmap methodology groups corporate counterparties based on exposure to key physical risk factors, by rating sectoral (sectoral average risk distribution), geographic (vulnerability and adaptive capacity) and value chain (sectoral average risk distribution) vulnerabilities in a climate change trajectory, in which no additional policy action is taken. These are then scored for the potential for financial loss in the short-term time horizon.

Ratings from low to high are based on a weighted average score (from 0 to 1), given by double-weighting sector and geography, and single-weighting value chain. Scores are given by the following inputs: – the counterparty’s sectoral activity (e.g., primary energy extraction presents higher physical risks than banks due to its average geographic footprint and vulnerability to financial losses in the short term from physical risk hazards); – the counterparty’s geographical location (e.g., countries in Southeast Asia tend to be higher risk than those in Western Europe, with some exceptions reflecting the potential for national economic resilience and subsidy to economic activities threatened by climate change); and – the potential disruption to a counterparty’s value chain, where relevant, (both its supply chain and distribution channels again reflecting the sectoral average geographic footprint and vulnerability).

We will continue to enhance our methodology in 2023, with relevant subject matter experts (e.g., country risk experts) and enhanced vendor data sources (e.g., systematic integration of geospatial tools and data).

Our current physical risk heatmap shows that we have relatively low exposure to activities rated as having high, moderately high or moderate vulnerability to physical climate risks. Key concentrations of exposure include high volumes of real estate lending in Switzerland. Most of our lending is to the financial sector, which by its nature has a lower physical climate risk. Key exceptions are lending to property insurance companies or lending in higher-risk regions, such as South Asia.

The chart below shows the location-specific risk distribution compared with the spread of physical risk across sectoral risk ratings versus country (risk domicile, see above) risk ratings. The size of the circle indicates the relative lending exposure.

48