CPMI and IOSCO Consult on a Paper on CCP Default Management Auctions
CPMI and IOSCO published, for public comment, a discussion paper on central counterparty (CCP) default management auctions. The discussion in this paper reflects the current practices at one or more CCPs and identifies the types of factors that one or more CCPs take into account when planning and conducting default management auctions. Additionally, the discussion paper identifies certain considerations that may be useful for CCPs to take into account when planning for auctions. CPMI and IOSCO also published a cover note listing the issues on which inputs are being solicited. The comment period on this discussion paper ends on August 09, 2019.
This discussion paper is intended to facilitate the sharing of existing practices and views on default management auctions and to advance industry efforts and foster dialog on the key concepts, processes, and operational aspects used by CCPs in planning and executing effective default management auctions. The effective and smooth management of a participant default is essential to the resilience of a CCP and can help reduce systemic risk. A default management auction is one of the tools that a CCP may use to transfer a defaulting participant’s positions, or subset thereof, to a non-defaulting participant, thus restoring the CCP to a matched book. The paper presents a number of questions and invites comments on the benefits and challenges of various approaches as well as on the potential ways to overcome challenges inherent in default management auctions.
The paper focuses on the following five key aspects of the default management auctions of a CCP:
- Governance—The paper discusses the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders in a CCP’s default management auction. The paper specifies that an effective auction process includes specifying the roles and responsibilities of the auction participants and a CCP’s board of directors, management, and other personnel, who may be involved in the auction process.
- Considerations for a successful default management auction—The paper outlines considerations of a successful default management auction and, by contrast, identifies scenarios in which a CCP may determine an auction to be unsuccessful. It also discusses activities that take place before the auction and the potential options available to a CCP in the event of an unsuccessful auction.
- Operational considerations—The paper describes the operational issues a CCP considers when planning and executing a default management auction.
- Client participation—The paper highlights that a CCP and its clearing members may take into account several considerations when deciding whether to permit or facilitate client participation, including liability of the clearing member, incentives of clients to bid competitively, the level of legal and operational readiness at the client, and the risk of information leakage.
- Default of a common participant across multiple CCPs—The paper identifies potential issues inherent when two or more CCPs conduct auctions concurrently, thus creating further operational and/or financial strains on auction participants.
Related Links
Comment Due Date: August 09, 2019
Keywords: International, Banking, Securities, CCP, Systemic Risk, Default Management Auction, Governance, CPMI, IOSCO
Featured Experts

María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer

Pierre-Etienne Chabanel
Brings expertise in technology and software solutions around banking regulation, whether deployed on-premises or in the cloud.

Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Previous Article
MAS Consults on Scope of Application of IAC GuidelinesNext Article
Dave Ramsden of BoE Speaks on Transition from LIBORRelated Articles
FED Revises Capital Planning and Stress Testing Requirements for Banks
FED finalized a rule that updates capital planning requirements to reflect the new framework from 2019 that sorts large banks into categories, with requirements that are tailored to the risks of each category.
ECB Releases Results of Bank Lending Survey for Fourth Quarter of 2020
ECB published results of the quarterly lending survey conducted on 143 banks in the euro area.
ESAs Publish Reporting Templates for Financial Conglomerates
ESAs published the final draft implementing technical standards on reporting of intra-group transactions and risk concentration of financial conglomerates subject to the supplementary supervision in EU.
EBA Publishes Report on Asset Encumbrance of Banks in EU
EBA published the annual report on asset encumbrance of banks in EU.
MAS Revises Guidelines on Technology Risk Management
MAS revised the guidelines that address technology and cyber risks of financial institutions, in an environment of growing use of cloud technologies, application programming interfaces, and rapid software development.
US Agencies Publish Updates for Call Reports, FFIEC 101, and FR Y-9C
FED updated the reporting form and instructions for the FR Y-9C report on consolidated financial statements for holding companies.
EBA Proposes Guidelines for Establishing Intermediate Parent Entities
EBA issued a consultation paper on the guidelines on monitoring of the threshold and other procedural aspects of the establishment of intermediate EU parent undertakings, or IPUs, as laid down in the Capital Requirements Directive.
EC Adopts Financial Reporting Changes Arising from Benchmark Reforms
EC published Regulation 2021/25 that addresses amendments related to the financial reporting consequences of replacement of the existing interest rate benchmarks with alternative reference rates.
BIS Bulletin Examines Key Elements of Policy Response to Cyber Risk
BIS published a bulletin, or a note, that examines the cyber threat landscape in the context of the pandemic and discusses policies to reduce risks to financial stability.
HMT Updates List of Post-Brexit Equivalence Decisions in UK
HM Treasury, also known as HMT, has updated the table containing the list of the equivalence decisions that came into effect in UK at the end of the transition period of its withdrawal from EU.