General Information & Client Service
  • Americas: +1.212.553.1653
  • Asia: +852.3551.3077
  • China: +86.10.6319.6580
  • EMEA: +44.20.7772.5454
  • Japan: +81.3.5408.4100
Media Relations
  • New York: +1.212.553.0376
  • London: +44.20.7772.5456
  • Hong Kong: +852.3758.1350
  • Tokyo: +813.5408.4110
  • Sydney: +61.2.9270.8141
  • Mexico City: +001.888.779.5833
  • Buenos Aires: +0800.666.3506
  • São Paulo: +0800.891.2518
August 09, 2018

FSB and other international standard-setters (CPMI, IOSCO, and BCBS) published the second report that maps interdependencies between central counterparties (CCPs) and their clearing members and other financial service providers. The international standard-setters had published the first report on central clearing interdependencies in July 2017.

To assess whether the findings of the July 2017 report (based on data as of September 2016) were stable over time, the international standard-setters conducted another more streamlined data collection (as of October 2017) from the same 26 CCPs. The results are broadly consistent with the previous analysis and show that:

  • Prefunded financial resources are concentrated at a small number of CCPs. The two largest CCPs account for nearly 40% of total prefunded financial resources provided to all CCPs, compared with 32% in the July 2017 report.
  • Exposures to CCPs are concentrated among a small number of entities. The largest 11 of the 306 clearing members are connected to between 16 and 25 CCPs. 
  • The relationships mapped are characterized, to varying degrees, by a core of highly connected CCPs and entities and a periphery of less highly connected CCPs and entities. However, even the less highly connected CCPs often are linked to at least one highly connected entity that indirectly connects the CCP into the more interconnected part of the network structure. 
  • A small number of entities tend to dominate the provision of each of the critical services required by CCPs. This relationship between CCPs and other entities suggests that a failure at one of these central elements of a CCP network would likely have significant consequences for the rest of the network.
  • Clearing members and clearing member affiliates are also important providers of other critical services required by CCPs and can maintain several types of relationships with multiple CCPs simultaneously. 

There are, however, some changes to highlight in the interdependencies in central clearing. For instance, the concentration of client clearing activity has decreased. Initial margins from clients are now concentrated in two CCPs, compared to only one. The analysis of interdependencies in central clearing is intended to provide useful inputs for designing supervisory stress tests and has informed the policy work as set out in the joint workplan to promote CCP resilience, recovery, and resolvability. The standard-setters published a report on the implementation of the workplan in July 2017.

 

Related Links

Keywords: International, PMI, Securities, CCPs, OTC Derivatives, Central Clearing, FSB, CPMI/IOSCO, BCBS

Related Articles
News

EBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Fourth Update for March 2019

EBA published answers to five questions under the Single Rulebook question and answer (Q&A) updates for this week.

March 22, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

ECB Updates Validation Checks and List of Identifiers Under AnaCredit

ECB updated the AnaCredit validation checks (Version 1.4) and the list of national identifiers (version 2.4) for AnaCredit reporting.

March 21, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

BCBS Publishes Results of the Basel III Monitoring Exercise

BCBS published results of the Basel III monitoring exercise based on data as of June 30, 2018.

March 20, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

EBA, FCA, and PRA Agree on MoU Template for Supervisory Cooperation

EBA, FCA, and PRA announced that they have agreed on a template for the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that sets out the expectations for supervisory cooperation and information-sharing arrangements between UK and EU/European Economic Area national authorities.

March 20, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

HKMA Publishes CoP on Loss-Absorbing Capacity Requirements of Banks

HKMA issued, in relation to the Financial Institutions Resolution (Loss-Absorbing Capacity Requirements—Banking Sector) Rules (LAC Rules) a chapter of a code of practice (LAC CoP) under section 196 of the Financial Institutions Resolution Ordinance (FIRO).

March 20, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

EBA Publishes Reports Monitoring the Implementation of Basel III in EU

EBA published two reports measuring the impact of implementing the final Basel III reforms and monitoring the implementation of liquidity measures in EU.

March 20, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

BCBS Publishes Results of Survey on Proportionality in Bank Regulation

BCBS published a report presenting the results of a survey conducted on proportionality practices in bank regulation and supervision.

March 19, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

US Agencies Adopt Interim Rule to Facilitate Transfers of Legacy Swaps

US Agencies (FCA, FDIC, FED, FHFA, and OCC) are adopting and inviting comments on an interim final rule.

March 19, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

EBA Updates List of Other Systemically Important Institutions in EU

EBA updated the 2018 list of other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) in EU. The list also reflects the additional capital buffers that the relevant authorities have set for the identified O-SIIs.

March 19, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
News

HKMA Expects Banks to Manage Risks Related to Crypto-Asset Exposures

HKMA issued a statement announcing that it expects authorized institutions to take note of the BCBS statement on crypto-assets and its prudential expectations.

March 18, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 2780