The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) published a report that assesses the business continuity planning activities of financial market infrastructures or FMIs. The report also presents a high-level summary of the responses of the financial market infrastructures to the COVID-19 pandemic in some member jurisdictions. It also identifies increased cyber risk and scope for improvement in certain areas.
The report finds that all the surveyed financial market infrastructures have operational reliability objectives, focusing on system availability and recovery time; they reportedly review their business continuity plans at least annually and test them regularly. However, the report found that the business continuity management of some, and potentially many, financial market infrastructures does not seem to aim to resume operations in a timely way, including in the event of a wide-scale or major disruption. The key findings of the exercise are summarized below:
- An identified concern relates to timely recovery in the event of a wide-scale or major disruption. Based on the information provided by the participating market infrastructures, there are doubts on whether their business continuity plans are designed to ensure that critical information technology systems can resume operations within two hours following disruptive events and enable the financial market infrastructure to complete settlement by the end of the day of the disruption, even in case of extreme circumstances. CPMI and IOSCO expect the relevant financial market infrastructures and their supervisors to address this as a matter of the highest priority.
- Cyber risk was another identified area of concern. A few financial market infrastructures in the sample did not provide specific business continuity plan objectives with respect to cyber risk. Among the financial market infrastructures that have specific business continuity plan objectives with respect to cyber risk, only a few explicitly acknowledged the breadth and depth of potential cyber attacks and the complexities of cyber risks that their business continuity plans may not be able to cover.
The report also noted that overall the financial market infrastructures have not experienced service disruptions during the pandemic. Financial market infrastructures have observed that the pandemic highlighted operational risks posed by third parties such as critical service providers. No major incidents involving third parties were reported during 2020. However, financial market infrastructures noted an increased threat of cyber risks, especially in remote working environments. In this context, financial market infrastructures have adopted enhanced cyber-security monitoring, with extra vigilance regarding their internal VPN networks and have trained their staff thoroughly on threats arising from remote access.
This review was a part of the regular monitoring of the implementation of the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructure (PFMI), which set international standards for payment, clearing, and settlement systems. Implementation is being monitored on three levels. Level 1 self-assessments report on whether a jurisdiction has completed the process of adopting legislation and other policies that will enable it to implement the Principles and Responsibilities. Level 2 assessments are peer reviews of the extent to which the content of the jurisdiction's implementation measures is complete and consistent with the PFMI. Level 3 peer reviews examine consistency in the outcomes of implementation of the Principles by financial market infrastructures and implementation of the Responsibilities by authorities. This report represents the Level 3 assessment of consistency in the outcomes of the implementation of the PFMI.
Keywords: International, Banking, Financial Market Infrastructure, FMI, Operational Risk, PFMI, PFMI Level 3, Business Continuity, COVID-19, Cyber Risk, IOSCO, CPMI
Leading economist; commercial real estate; performance forecasting, econometric infrastructure; data modeling; credit risk modeling; portfolio assessment; custom commercial real estate analysis; thought leader.
Previous ArticleAPRA Issues Update on Capital Reform Policy Settings for Banks
Next ArticleEBA Examines Asset Encumbrance in Banking Sector
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published four draft principles to support supervisory efforts in assessing the representativeness of COVID-19-impacted data for banks using the internal ratings based (IRB) credit risk models.
The European Council and the European Parliament (EP) reached a provisional political agreement on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) launched a consultation (CP6/22) that sets out proposal for a new Supervisory Statement on expectations for management of model risk by banks.
The European Commission (EC) published the Delegated Regulation 2022/954, which amends regulatory technical standards on specification of the calculation of specific and general credit risk adjustments.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) announced that the Green and Sustainable Finance (GSF) Cross-Agency Steering Group has launched the information and data repositories and outlined the progress made in advancing the development of green and sustainable finance in Hong Kong.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub updated its work program, announcing a set of projects across various centers.
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published two consultation papers—one on the supervisory statement on exclusions related to systemic events and the other on the supervisory statement on the management of non-affirmative cyber exposures.
The Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) published a report that explores the feasibility of integrating the G-Cubed general equilibrium model into the NGFS suite of models.
Certain members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs issued a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published a consultation paper on the advice on the review of the securitization prudential framework in Solvency II.