The $10 Billion Wall: Why Your TPRM Program Doesn't Need to Look Like JPMorgan's

I keep having the same conversation with other risk managers: "Are we doing enough? Should our program look more like [insert money center bank]?" And honestly, probably not. Here's why.

Regulators Expect Different Things at Different Scales

That sounds obvious, but I see so many shops trying to build enterprise-level sophistication at $2 billion in assets because they read about best practices from institutions 50x their size.

The regulatory threshold that actually matters? $10 billion.

That's where Dodd-Frank's enhanced prudential standards kick in. Cross that line and suddenly you're dealing with DFAST, more intensive supervision cycles, and materially different expectations across your entire risk and compliance infrastructure.

Below it? Examiners want to see a program that's appropriate for your current footprint—not a BMW engine in a Honda Civic.

What Does This Actually Look Like?

Take TPRM since that's what I live in:

$500M Bank: Vendor list in Excel, standard due diligence packets, someone coordinating part-time. Get annual SOC reports from critical vendors, verify insurance, done. That's not lazy—that's proportionate.

$5B Bank: Formalized tiering methodology, built templates, light contract repository. Reviewing vendors on a schedule based on risk tier. Still might be one person wearing the TPRM hat among other duties. And that's fine.

$10B+ Bank: The conversation changes. Now examiners expect continuous monitoring, board-level reporting, actual dedicated headcount, probably a GRC platform, real fourth-party oversight framework. Not because best practices say so—because the regulatory regime literally changed.

$100B Bank: Full enterprise stack—specialized teams, advanced analytics, real-time dashboards, the works. That's not gold-plating, that's table stakes at that scale.

This Isn't Just a TPRM Thing

BSA/AML program sophistication, model risk management depth, cybersecurity frameworks, internal audit scope—all of it scales the same way. The expectations at $50 billion are fundamentally different than at $5 billion, and regulators know it.

The Trap I See People Fall Into

They're at $3 billion growing 15% annually, so they start building for $10 billion today. That's strategic planning, not compliance. Your next exam is going to judge you against where you are now, not where you'll be in three years.

"Build programs that fit your current balance sheet. Absolutely plan for maturation as you scale—but don't confuse the roadmap with the current requirement."
RM

About the Author

Risk Management Consultant

A seasoned risk management professional with 15+ years experience in banking compliance, specializing in third-party risk management and regulatory frameworks. I help financial institutions build risk programs that are proportionate to their size and complexity while meeting regulatory expectations.

Let's Discuss Your Risk Management Needs

Ready to build a TPRM framework that fits your institution? Schedule a free consultation to explore how we can help.

Schedule Consultation →