Analysis and Problems of the Risk Monitoring System in the Banking System of Uzbekistan (Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research))

Summary

• The article examines the institutional foundations, prudential control mechanisms, and indicators used in the risk monitoring system of Uzbekistan.p.1
• Key indicators evaluated in the banking monitoring framework include capital adequacy, liquidity ratio, NPL level, and profitability.p.2
• The existing monitoring system relies heavily on static, retrospective data and suffers from low automation and database integration issues.p.2
• Central Bank regulations, such as Regulation No. 3427 on risk management and Regulation No. 2693 on capital adequacy, establish prudential supervision norms.p.3
• International models from the United States, European Union, Singapore, and South Korea demonstrate the benefits of real-time monitoring, Basel III, RegTech, and AI.p.1
• Adoption of Big Data, AI platforms, cloud technologies, and predictive analytics is recommended to enable near-real-time monitoring and early risk forecasting.p.3

Key insights

1. Risk monitoring in commercial banks of Uzbekistan is primarily driven by internal audit, compliance, and risk management departments adhering to Central Bank prudential standards.p.2
2. Current risk monitoring models in Uzbekistan are hindered by static indicators that fail to capture real-time dynamic changes in bank risk profiles.p.2
3. Insufficient interbank data integration and limited implementation of modern analytical platforms reduce overall monitoring effectiveness.p.2
4. Central Bank Regulation No. 2709 sets liquidity management requirements, while Regulation No. 2696 governs asset quality classification and loss reserves.p.3
5. Deploying AI platforms and Big Data analytics provides high accuracy in risk assessment and supports instant data monitoring.p.3
6. A transition from static, retrospective control toward dynamic, near-real-time predictive monitoring is essential for financial stability in Uzbekistan.p.3