Post-trade risk reduction has become increasingly common as a means to reduce risks in the derivatives market. Portfolio compression is a case in point: offsetting trades between multiple parties are torn up, which reduces the size of gross exposures, in turn reducing systemic risk. Over €1,000 trillion in derivatives exposures has been eliminated in this manner.
Regulators recognize the value of compression. Under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR), market participants with more than 500 over-the-counter (OTC) trades on their books are required to examine the possibility of performing portfolio compression twice a year.
However, EMIR simultaneously disincentivizes use of this service by requiring administrative trades that result from compression, and which fall under the clearing mandate, to be cleared. This limits the ability of participants to perform compression and reduce risk.
The same is true of other post-trade risk reduction services like counterparty rebalancing. This involves inserting new, market-risk neutral transactions into netting sets to reduce risk exposures between counterparties. This decreases counterparty credit risk and therefore reduces systemic risk. However, those new transactions are required to be cleared if they are subject to the clearing obligation, preventing counterparty rebalancing risk reduction from taking place. As a result, counterparty rebalancing today is only limited to FX derivatives, which are not subject to the clearing obligation. Over €100 billion in counterparty credit risk has been reduced in this manner.
ISDA, the EBF, ICMA and ISLA believe EMIR should be amended as part of the Regulatory Fitness and Performance program (REFIT) to allow non-price forming, market-risk neutral transactions that result from post-trade risk reduction services to be exempted from the clearing obligation.
To read the full whitepaper, click on the link below.
Documents (1) for Incentivizing Post-trade Risk Reduction
Latest
Recognition of Cross-product Netting is Critical
US regulators are in the process of making important changes to the regulatory capital framework by proposing modifications to the enhanced supplementary leverage ratio, which should help stop it from acting as a non-risk-sensitive constraint on bank capacity – a...
ISDA, GFXD Response to FCA on SI Regime
On September 10, ISDA and the Global Foreign Exchange Division (GFXD) of the Global Financial Markets Association responded to the Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) consultation paper CP25/20 on the systematic internalizer (SI) regime for derivatives and bonds. ISDA and the...
ISDA, IIF Response to PRA on Market Risk Framework
On September 12, ISDA and the Institute of International Finance (IIF) submitted a joint response to the Prudential Regulation Authority’s (PRA) consultation on adjustments to the market risk capital framework (CP 17/25). ISDA and the IIF strongly believe the market...
ISDA Response on Clearing Costs
On September 8, ISDA responded to consultation by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) on a draft regulatory technical standard on clearing fees and associated costs (article 7c(4) of the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR)). In the response, ISDA...