{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02929427430093209, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.5964912280701755, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The FVA Puzzle: Accounting, Risk Management and Collateral Trading

We recently introduced the FVA/FDA accounting framework for funding costs, aiming to provide an accounting method that reasonably balances the, often conflicting, concerns of accountants, regulators, traders, and financial economists. While introduction of FVA/FDA accounting does not lead to write-offs of Net Income, regulatory capital measures and FTP policies are considerably different from those in funding-free accounting regimes. In this paper, we provide a concise comparison of FVA/FDA accounting with the FCA/FBA method currently endorsed by several large banks. We discuss detailed FTP policies, risk management implications, and quantify the notion of funding arbitrage.