ISDA published a set of best practices for central counterparties (CCPs) to ensure greater consistency in risk practices at CCPs across the globe. The paper highlights steps that can be taken to minimize the potential for a member default to impact other members and the financial system as a whole, except in an extreme stress event.
The paper recommends that CCP risk management decisions be based on the risk profile of a product, rather than on whether a derivative is an exchange-traded or over-the-counter (OTC) product. Other best practice recommendations include ensuring CCPs have risk controls and margin requirements that adapt to concentration, liquidity, member credit quality, and wrong-way risk in a member’s portfolio. CCPs should also have effective and transparent default management processes and robust membership criteria. The paper sets out the following best practices:
- Risk management must be aligned with the underlying risk of a given product.
- CCPs must have robust membership requirements that are regularly reviewed.
- Products cleared by a CCP must be sufficiently standardized and liquid.
- CCPs must ensure they have a sufficient number of members to mutualize risk.
- Margin must be calculated consistently across all products, taking account of concentration, liquidity, and wrong-way risk.
- Controls should be used to protect against erroneous trades and the build-up of concentrated positions.
- Key documentation must be disclosed, including margin and stress testing models and default management procedures.
- The size of the default fund should be aligned with key best practices, with limits on the portion of the default fund that can be consumed by any one member.
- The default management process should include key elements—for instance, ensuring sufficient participation in auctions—and should be tested regularly.
- Parties underwriting the counterparty risk of a CCP should be part of its governance.
Keywords: International, Securities, CCP, OTC Derivatives, Systemic Risk, Margin Requirements, ISDA
Previous ArticleHKMA Publishes Its Work Priorities for the Banking Sector in 2019
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2021/763 that lays down implementing technical standards for supervisory reporting and public disclosure of the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL).
EBA published a report that examines the convergence of prudential supervisory practices in 2020 and offers conclusions of the EBA college monitoring activity.
APRA announced the standardization of quarterly reporting due dates for authorized deposit-taking institutions.
The private sector working group of ECB on euro risk-free rates published the recommendations to address events that would trigger fallbacks in the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR)-related contracts, along with the €STR-based EURIBOR fallback rates (rates that could be used if a fallback is triggered).
Bundesbank published a list of "EntryPoints" that are accepted in its reporting system; the list provides taxonomy version and name of the module against each EntryPoint.
EBA published the phase 1 of its reporting framework 3.1, with the technical package covering the new reporting requirements for investment firms (under the implementing technical standards on investment firms reporting).
The Sustainable Finance Taskforce of IOSCO held two roundtables, with global stakeholders, on the IOSCO priorities to enhance the reliability, comparability, and consistency of sustainability-related disclosures and to collect views on the practical implementation of a global system architecture for these disclosures.
Asia Pacific Australia Banking APS 111 Capital Adequacy Regulatory Capital Basel RBNZ APRA
ESMA published the final guidelines on outsourcing to cloud service providers.
EBA published annual data for two key concepts and indicators in the Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) Directive—available financial means and covered deposits.