← Back to Regulatory Radar

PRA CP9/26: The Market-Risk IMA Just Became More Attainable

On 19 June 2026 the PRA published CP9/26 — adjustments to the internal model approach for market risk under Basel 3.1. The consultation closes 18 September 2026 and the changes are proposed to take effect on 1 January 2028, aligned with the UK’s IMA go-live under PS1/26. The proposals loosen the two quantitative gates that have kept trading desks off the IMA — the P&L attribution test and risk-factor eligibility — and restructure the treatment of non-modellable risk factors. Desks that shelved an IMA application on FRTB economics should re-run the numbers.

18 Sep 2026
Consultation closes — CP9/26 published 19 June 2026
24 → 16
Verifiable prices required for risk-factor eligibility at liquidity horizons above 20 days
1 Jan 2028
Proposed implementation — aligned with the UK IMA go-live (PS1/26)

Six adjustments, two of which move the IMA business case

CP9/26 is a package of calibration changes, not a redesign of the FRTB. But the PLAT and risk-factor-eligibility moves change the arithmetic that decided most desks’ standardised-vs-internal-model choice.

1

PLAT: monitoring window extended to three years

P&L attribution test monitoring extends from one year to three, and test failures during that window no longer trigger automatic desk reallocation to the standardised approach. The single largest source of IMA cliff-risk is deferred.

2

Risk-factor eligibility: 24 → 16 verifiable prices

For risk factors with liquidity horizons above 20 days, the verifiable-price requirement drops from 24 to 16, with pro-rated requirements for new issuances. Fewer factors fall out of the model into NMRF treatment.

3

NMRFs split into Type 1 and Type 2

Risk factors that fail the quantitative test but pass qualitative tests (Type 1) stay in the model with a capital add-on; only those failing both (Type 2) are excluded. NMRF calculations are simplified and move to monthly frequency.

4

Diversification between ASA and IMA portfolios

Marginal adjustments recognise diversification between advanced-standardised and IMA portfolios, and hard caps are replaced with permission-based alternatives — a supervisory-dialogue lever, not an automatic one.

5

CIU look-through at 90%

A 90% look-through threshold for collective investment undertakings, with extended treatment for index-tracking funds — removing a persistent operational blocker for funds-heavy books.

6

Operational clarifications

Alternative risk-factor coverage tests and guidance on desks for GIRR internal hedges. Small in capital terms; material in model-approval paperwork.

Both quantitative gates that kept desks off the IMA loosen

The risk-factor eligibility threshold falls by a third for less-liquid factors, and the PLAT consequence window triples — without the automatic reallocation penalty that made a marginal desk untouchable.

Verifiable prices required · liquidity horizon > 20 days Current rules 24 CP9/26 proposal 16 PLAT monitoring window before consequences bind Current rules 12 months CP9/26 proposal 36 months No automatic desk reallocation on failures during the window

Source: PRA CP9/26 — Basel 3.1: adjustments to the internal model approach for market risk, 19 June 2026.

From PS1/26 to a 2028 IMA go-live

20 Jan 2026
PS1/26 — final Basel 3.1 rules
19 Jun 2026
CP9/26 published
18 Sep 2026
Consultation closes
1 Jan 2027
Basel 3.1 go-live (standardised approaches)
1 Jan 2028
UK IMA go-live — CP9/26 changes proposed to apply

Who should re-run the IMA case — and who inherits a reporting split

A

Desks that chose ASA on the old arithmetic

Most UK trading businesses concluded under CP16/22-era calibration that the IMA’s approval cost and PLAT cliff-risk outweighed the capital benefit. CP9/26 moves both inputs. The decision deserves a re-run on the proposed parameters — before the application queue forms ahead of January 2028.

B

EU G-SIBs with London entities: a year of split methodology

EU FRTB own-funds requirements start on 1 January 2027 (CDR (EU) 2025/1496); the UK IMA arrives a year later. Groups running London desks will carry a split-calibration year across entities — a reconciliation burden the group market-risk function should plan for now, not discover in Q4 2027.

C

Permission-based levers reward early supervisory dialogue

The replacement of hard caps with permission-based diversification treatment shifts value into the supervisory relationship. Banks that engage the PRA on portfolio structure during the consultation window — not after the policy statement — will shape their own treatment.

Re-running the IMA business case?

We quantify the capital delta between ASA and IMA under the CP9/26 parameters — desk by desk, with the approval-path risk priced in. Senior-only, partner-led.

Talk to a partner →
Sources & references

Primary documents cited in this analysis

  1. [1]
    PRACP9/26 — Basel 3.1: adjustments to the internal model approach for market risk, 19 June 2026 → source
  2. [2]
    PRAPS1/26 — Implementation of the Basel 3.1 final rules, 20 January 2026 (Basel 3.1 go-live 1 January 2027; IMA 1 January 2028) → source
  3. [3]
    EUCommission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1496 — postponement of the FRTB own-funds application date to 1 January 2027 → source

Dates, paragraph numbers and document versions verified at publication. Where consultations are still open, we flag draft status in text. Corrections: research@ezelman.com.

From analysis to mandate

This analysis underpins our FRTB and market-risk capital mandates.

Partner-led, senior-only, no audit conflict. If the question in this piece is live at your institution, the first conversation is with a partner — not a BD team.

Talk to a partner →
Follow Ezelman on LinkedIn — Regulatory insights read by 2,000+ risk professionals across Europe & the GCC Follow →