BIS published a bulletin that examines the nexus between banks and central counterparties (CCPs) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The bulletin highlights that when thinking about margining, central banks need to assess banks and CCPs jointly rather than in isolation. In the CCP-bank nexus, actions that seem prudent from the perspective of an individual institution have the potential to strain the stability of the entire nexus through interactions. For instance, increasing margin during market stress does address increased counterparty risk. However, it can put undue pressure on clearing member banks at the wrong time.
The COVID-19 pandemic led to market turmoil in mid-March. CCPs remained resilient, vindicating the post-crisis reforms that incentivized central clearing. The procyclicality of leverage embedded in margining models might have played a role in the events of mid-March. These margin models are critical because they underpin the management of counterparty credit risk. Margin models of some CCPs seem to have underestimated market volatility, in part because they have relied on a short period of historical price movements from tranquil times. These CCPs had to catch up and increase margins at the wrong time, squeezing liquidity when it was most needed. Going forward, the interaction of CCPs with clearing member banks is critical. Importantly, actions that might seem prudent from an individual institution’s perspective, such as increasing margins in a turmoil, might destabilize the nexus overall. Therefore, central banks and regulators need to assess banks and CCPs jointly rather than in isolation.
Keywords: International, Banking, COVID-19, Initial Margin, Variation Margin, Procyclicality, Liquidity Risk, Counterparty Credit Risk, BIS
Previous ArticleECB Group Recommends Voluntary Compensation for Legacy Swaptions
APRA updated the lists of the Direct to APRA (D2A) validation and derivation rules for authorized deposit-taking institutions, insurers, and superannuation entities.
EC adopted a package that includes the digital finance and retail payments strategies and the legislative proposals for regulatory frameworks on crypto-assets and digital operational resilience.
ECB published an opinion (CON/2020/22) on proposals for regulations amending the securitization framework of EU, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
FCA is consulting on its approach to the authorization and supervision of international firms operating in UK.
MAS published amendments to Notice 637 on the risk-based capital adequacy requirements for reporting banks incorporated in Singapore.
FCA announced that it will move firms to RegData from Gabriel in the coming months in stages, based on the reporting requirements of firms.
ISDA issued a letter to regulators to flag that it now expects the supplement to the 2006 ISDA Definitions and the Interbank Offered Rate (IBOR) Fallbacks Protocol to be effective around mid- to late-January 2021.
APRA has concluded its review of the comprehensive plans of authorized deposit-taking institutions for the assessment and management of loans with repayment deferrals.
ESAs (EBA, EIOPA, and ESMA) published the first joint report that assesses risks in the financial sector since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
BoE and HM Treasury confirmed that the COVID Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF) will close for new purchases of commercial paper, with effect from March 23, 2021.