SRB MREL Dashboard H2 2025: Year-End Resolution Benchmarks

ByOfficer

On 20 July 2026 the Single Resolution Board published its MREL Dashboard for the second half of 2025, and the SRB MREL dashboard reads as continuity. Resolution entities across the Banking Union carried an average final MREL target of 27.8% of their Total Risk Exposure Amount (TREA), including the Combined Buffer Requirement, and the aggregate shortfall against those final targets was EUR 0.2 billion. That shortfall works out at less than 0.01% of TREA, and the SRB attributes it to a handful of banks still inside individually set transitional periods. Every other entity met its requirement.

For a reporting officer, that dashboard is a benchmarking mirror. The figures in it come from the quarterly MREL returns banks already file, aggregated and set against the target in each bank’s SRB decision. Reading it well tells you where your own institution sits relative to the Banking Union average, and where the resolution authority is looking next.

The stable reading carries a warning reporting teams should not misread. A near-zero aggregate shortfall is an average across the SRB’s remit, and it says nothing about the composition or subordination tests that sit underneath each bank’s headline ratio.

Related reading: EBA MREL Dashboard Q4 2025: Resolution Reporting Benchmarks

The dates that anchor the H2 2025 dashboard

Resolution planning runs on a fixed calendar, and the dashboard sits on top of it. The operative dates a reporting team should hold in view are these:

  • 31 December 2025: the reference date for the H2 2025 data.
  • 20 July 2026: the SRB published the MREL Dashboard H2 2025.
  • 1 January 2024: the general deadline by which resolution entities were expected to meet their final MREL targets, with the SRB able to set longer, bank-specific transitional periods under Article 12k of the SRMR.
  • Quarterly MREL reporting reference dates of 31 March, 30 June, 30 September and 31 December, with remittance to the resolution authority on 19 May, 18 August, 18 November and 18 February respectively under the reporting ITS.

The half-yearly dashboard and the quarterly return run on two different clocks; the deadline that bites is the quarterly remittance, the submission the next dashboard is built from.

What the SRB actually publishes in a MREL dashboard

The dashboard is built in two parts. The first tracks the evolution of MREL targets and shortfalls for resolution entities, which carry external MREL, and for non-resolution entities, which carry internal MREL, together with the level and composition of the MREL resources that resolution entities hold. The second looks at recent developments in the cost of funding and the gross issuance of MREL-eligible instruments over the half-year.

Every figure is drawn from bank data reported to the SRB for entities under its remit, which matters operationally. Because the dashboard aggregates returns banks already submit, a late or error-flagged submission distorts the bank’s own line in a benchmark the whole Banking Union reads. Reconciling your return against the dashboard bands is one of the cheapest data-quality checks a resolution reporting team has.

Reading the 27.8% target and the EUR 0.2 billion shortfall

The average final MREL target for resolution entities, including the Combined Buffer Requirement, stood at 27.8% of TREA, stable against the first half of 2025. The aggregate shortfall against final targets was EUR 0.2 billion, below 0.01% of TREA, and the SRB ties it to a few banks still working through transitional periods.

Stability at the aggregate level is easy to over-read. The 27.8% figure is an average final target rather than a compliance score, and the near-zero shortfall is measured against final targets for banks whose transitional deadline has already passed. It does not capture subordination shortfalls, which are tested separately, and it tells an individual bank nothing about its own headroom. A resolution entity can sit inside the aggregate and still face a binding gap on the subordinated portion of its requirement.

The SRMR machinery behind the benchmark

MREL for banks in the SRB’s remit is set under the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation, Regulation (EU) No 806/2014, in Articles 12a to 12k. MREL is calibrated as two amounts, one based on TREA and one on the Total Exposure Measure, and a resolution entity has to satisfy both; the dashboard expresses the binding requirement as the higher of the TREA amount plus the Combined Buffer Requirement and the leverage-based amount, converted into TREA terms. Subsidiaries that are not resolution entities meet internal MREL under Article 12g, which can be satisfied with eligible liabilities or, where the resolution authority permits, with guarantees.

The subordination dimension is where the aggregate hides the most. For top-tier banks the subordination requirement is capped at 27% of TREA under Article 45b(4) of the BRRD, applied through the SRMR for banks in the SRB’s remit. That cap governs how much of the requirement must be met with own funds and subordinated instruments rather than senior debt, and it is a separate test from the headline MREL ratio the dashboard leads with.

How the dashboard connects to your MREL returns

Nothing in the dashboard creates a new reporting obligation. The data behind it flows from the supervisory reporting of MREL and TLAC set out in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/763, the ITS that defines the M-series templates banks submit to their resolution authority each quarter. Those templates were amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1618 to bring in the daisy chain framework from Regulation (EU) 2022/2036 and the prior permission deduction requirements, so the H2 2025 figures already reflect the amended template set.

Teams sometimes conflate the SRB dashboard with the EBA MREL dashboard. The two cover different populations. The SRB reports on entities under its own remit inside the Banking Union, while the EBA aggregates across the wider EU, so the averages and shortfalls will not line up. Our guide to MREL reporting requirements sets out the template mechanics that feed both.

When I reconcile a MREL return against the published dashboard bands, the useful question is not whether the aggregate shortfall moved but whether the subordination headroom still sits where the SRB decision letter placed it. The dashboard headline can be flat while an individual bank’s subordinated position drifts.

The funding and issuance signal to watch

The dashboard’s second section covers the cost of funding and the gross issuance of MREL-eligible instruments over H2 2025. These are the pages resolution and treasury teams read together, because the price and volume of eligible issuance decide how expensive it is to hold the capacity the SRB requires. The SRB tracks these developments and stops at describing the market, without setting an issuance target or forecasting the next half-year.

Read the issuance data as a market snapshot rather than a supervisory expectation. A half-year of heavy senior non-preferred issuance tells you the cohort refinanced, and it carries no implication that your own plan is on or off track. That judgement stays with your resolution planning cycle and bank-specific SRB decision.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the dashboard change my reporting obligations?

No. It reuses data your team already submits under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/763. The obligation to watch is the quarterly M-template remittance, which has fed the amended template set since Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1618 introduced the daisy chain and prior permission deduction changes.

How is the SRB dashboard different from the EBA MREL dashboard?

They cover different populations. The SRB dashboard is limited to entities under its own remit in the Banking Union, while the EBA dashboard aggregates across the wider EU. A figure in one will not reconcile to the other, so cite the correct source when you benchmark internally.

What is the difference between external and internal MREL?

External MREL applies to resolution entities, the point in a group where resolution action would be taken. Internal MREL applies to non-resolution entities under Article 12g of the SRMR, so that losses can be passed up to the resolution entity without putting the subsidiary into formal resolution. The dashboard reports both streams separately.

Why is there still a shortfall if banks continue to meet their targets?

The SRB set individual transitional periods for reaching final targets, and a small number of banks are still inside those windows. Their gap is what drives the EUR 0.2 billion aggregate. The statement that banks continue to meet their targets refers to entities whose transitional deadline has passed.

What is the subordination cap that sits under the headline ratio?

For top-tier banks the subordination requirement is capped at 27% of TREA under Article 45b(4) of the BRRD, applied through the SRMR for banks in the SRB’s remit. It governs how much of the requirement must be met with own funds and subordinated debt, so a bank can meet its overall MREL and still have a subordination gap.

Related Articles

Key Takeaways

  • The SRB MREL Dashboard H2 2025, published on 20 July 2026, reports an average final MREL target of 27.8% of TREA for resolution entities including the Combined Buffer Requirement, stable against H1 2025.
  • The aggregate shortfall against final targets was EUR 0.2 billion, below 0.01% of TREA, driven by a few banks still inside individually set transitional periods.
  • A near-zero aggregate shortfall is an average, not a per-bank compliance score, and it does not capture separately tested subordination shortfalls.
  • The dashboard creates no new obligation; it aggregates the quarterly MREL returns filed under Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/763, amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1618.
  • The SRB dashboard and the EBA dashboard cover different populations, so their figures do not reconcile to each other.
  • External MREL applies to resolution entities and internal MREL to non-resolution entities under Article 12g of the SRMR, and the dashboard reports both.

Sources and References

  • Single Resolution Board, Banks continue to meet their MREL targets at year end 2025 (MREL Dashboard H2 2025), 20 July 2026: srb.europa.eu
  • Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation), Articles 12a to 12k: EUR-Lex
  • Directive 2014/59/EU (Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive), Article 45b: EUR-Lex
  • Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/763 (ITS on supervisory reporting and public disclosure of MREL and TLAC): EUR-Lex
  • Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1618 (amending ITS on MREL and TLAC reporting and disclosure): EUR-Lex
  • Regulation (EU) 2022/2036 (daisy chain framework): EUR-Lex
  • Single Resolution Board, MREL Policy 2024: srb.europa.eu

What the flat line asks of reporting teams

A stable 27.8% average and a shortfall you can round to zero are good news for Banking Union resolvability. The risk for a reporting team is treating the aggregate as a verdict on its own bank. The dashboard rewards institutions that reconcile their quarterly returns, watch subordination headroom against the SRB decision, and read the funding pages as market colour. The next edition is built from the returns filed in the meantime, so this quarter’s submission quality shapes how your bank appears.

Last updated: July 2026

Disclaimer: The information on RegReportingDesk.com is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or compliance advice. Always consult your compliance officer, legal counsel, or the relevant supervisory authority for guidance specific to your institution.

Similar Posts