The ITS Instructions of EBA’s Supervisory Benchmarking, as in Annex IV for field C.100, requires that, in order to compute the average CCF at counterparty/portfolio level (i.e. Template C101, C102 and C103), the weights that shall be used shall be the amounts to which the CCFs are applied in order to obtain the EAD. Internal EAD models that foresee multiple factors for the computation of the EAD are applied to different amounts related to the same facility, for instance undrawn amount and granted amount. The following example shows a possible calculation of EAD based on authorized Internal models which foresees multiple parameters: EAD=(p_1*undrawn+ p_2*granted+ p_3*DrawingsAfterDefault+ ...)*add_on As set in Annex IV C.100, in line with the Article 166 (8) of the Regulation EU No 575/2013 (CRR). which specifies the undrawn amount as the basis for the EAD computation in case of above described Internal authorized Model, it has considered the sole undrawn amount: therefore the parameter reported as CCF (C.100) is the factor of the EAD formula which is applied to the undrawn amount, i.e. p_1 in the example formula above, weighted to the related portion of undrawn amount (to which p_1 is applied). This approach would reflect the EAD internal modelling methodology, strictly based on model components, thus not including possible add-ons (which could be either regulatory add-ons or explicit margins of conservatism) applied on the top of the EAD formula.