92. The review and assessment of the stress testing programmes and their results, including management mitigative actions is a part of the overall assessment of an institution's risk and business profile, as well as its compliance with the CRD and other regulatory requirements. Supervisors acknowledge the limitations of stress testing and the need for a flexible approach reflecting the principles of proportionality and relevance to the particular institutions.

 Guideline 18. Supervisors should undertake regular reviews of institutions' stress testing programmes covering scenario selection, methodologies, infrastructure and use of stress tests.

93. Supervisors should assess institutions' compliance with these guidelines taking into account the principle of proportionality and relevance. In their review, supervisors should evaluate the extent to which stress testing is embedded in an institution's risk management framework. They should also assess whether institutions devote sufficient resources and have adequate procedures in place to undertake rigorous, forward-looking stress testing in order to identify circumstances that could result in significant adverse impact on the institution and its viability. 

94. Supervisors should consider whether senior management have been sufficiently involved in the stress testing programme and the management body sufficiently informed. Supervisors should require institutions to submit firm-wide stress testing results to them on a regular basis. They should also assess the extent of integration of stress testing outputs into decision-making throughout the organisation, including the strategic business decisions of the management body and senior management.