France regulatory capital to risk-weighted assets
France regulatory capital to risk-weighted assets stood at 19.56% in Q1 2026, according to IMF – Financial Soundness Indicators (FSIC), data reported by Banque de France. It is one of the indicators in the Financial soundness indicators table (Value · Quarterly), with a complete series running from Q4 2008 to Q1 2026. The complete series with an interactive chart, free to download.
This indicator in the Financial soundness indicators table
| Indicator | Q1-2026 | Q4-2025 | Q3-2025 | Q2-2025 | Q1-2025 | Q4-2024 | Q3-2024 | Q2-2024 | Q1-2024 | Q4-2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capital adequacy of deposit takers | |||||||||||
| Regulatory capital to risk-weighted assets | 19.56 | 19.64 | 19.62 | 19.62 | 19.81 | 19.78 | 19.32 | 19.54 | 19.57 | 19.52 | |
| Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets | 17.2 | 17.29 | 17.24 | 17.27 | 17.23 | 17.36 | 16.92 | 17.13 | 17.13 | 17.21 |
Understanding france regulatory capital to risk-weighted assets
This indicator calculates total qualifying regulatory capital expressed as a percentage of the aggregate risk-weighted assets held by deposit-taking institutions. Qualifying capital includes instruments meeting strict criteria for loss absorption capacity, encompassing both high-grade core capital elements and supplementary capital tiers. Risk-weighted assets are derived by adjusting balance sheet exposures and off-balance sheet commitments according to prescribed risk weights reflecting credit, market, and operational risks. Unlike simpler leverage metrics that evaluate unweighted assets, this measure scales capital directly against the risk profile of the underlying portfolio. Asset classes carrying higher perceived risk contribute greater weights to the denominator, meaning identical nominal lending volumes generate differing denominator values depending on borrower risk characteristics and internal or standardized model outputs.
Evaluation requires caution regarding regulatory framework transitions, alterations in risk-weight calculation methodologies, and periodic supervisory reclassifications that can introduce structural breaks independent of underlying balance sheet adjustments. Early reporting periods often incorporate provisional estimates subject to subsequent verification by supervisory authorities. Comparing this percentage directly across jurisdictions demands attention to differing national discretions applied during implementation. Analysts should prioritize sequential period comparisons alongside longer-term structural trajectories while accounting for potential cyclical fluctuations in risk-weighted asset densities that occur independently of capital raising or distribution events.
Frequently asked questions
- What differentiates regulatory capital to risk-weighted assets from simple leverage measures?
- This series adjusts the denominator by weighting assets according to perceived risk profiles, whereas leverage metrics compare capital against unweighted total balance sheet exposure.
- Why might this ratio shift even if a bank's total capital holding remains completely unchanged?
- Shifts in the composition of lending portfolios toward higher or lower risk categories alter the denominator of risk-weighted assets, modifying the final percentage without any actual capital transaction.
- Are early estimates of this ratio subject to revision by supervisory authorities?
- Initial figures often reflect provisional data that may be adjusted following subsequent reporting validations and regulatory audits of asset risk classifications.