Infrastructure Issues in the Financial Services Industry: A Case for a Central Counterparty for Data Management
Journal of Securities Operations & Custody, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 202-224, October 2009
24 Pages Posted: 24 Apr 2009 Last revised: 8 Feb 2010
Date Written: August 30, 2009
Collaboration and risk sharing through industry sponsored centralized facilities, i.e. clearing houses, central securities depositories, payment and netting systems, and central counterparties, has been used extensively in the financial services industry. However, it has only been applied to the variable value portion of transactions (principally quantities, transaction prices and monetary values). This paper proposes the same techniques be applied, separately and earlier in a financial transaction's life cycle, to the matching and settling of the non-valued (referential) data components of these transactions. These data components comprise upwards of 70% of a financial transaction's assembled parts. Faults in properly identifying this data, as well as mismatches that occur in separately sourced and assembled financial transactions that counterparties attempt to match prior to payment, are a large source of matching errors. The result is significant imbedded industry-wide operational costs, individual firm monetary loss and counterparty risk, and global systemic risk.
The paper advises that a new facility, the Central Counterparty for Data Management (CCDM) be established to access and match multiple incoming sources of referential data at the pre-trade financial transaction assembly point, "clear" this data through best-of-breed computer analysis, and "settle" (distribute) industry accepted, CCDM assured data sets to participants, making it available to be attached to the variable value portion of the transaction at transaction assembly time. By doing so at the immediate front-end of a financial transaction's life cycle significant improvements can be made in lowering operational costs, reducing transaction failure rates, and reducing operational losses resulting from data failures in the post trade matching, clearing, settlement and reporting environment.
Keywords: Central Counterparty, Data Management, Risk Management, Payment & Settlement, Clearance & Custody
JEL Classification: D2, E22, E44, F2, G2, L2, L5, O31, O33, O38
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Basel Ii and Operational Risk - Overview of Key Concerns
The Quantification of Operational Risk
By Markus Leippold and Paolo Vanini
Operational Risk and Reference Data: Exploring Costs, Capital Requirements and Risk Mitigation
By Allan D. Grody, Fotios Harmantzis, ...
Operational Risk - The Sting is Still in the Tail But the Poison Depends on the Dose
Operational Risk: The Sting is Still in the Tail but the Poison Depends on the Dose
A Test of the Strategic Effect of Basel Ii Operational Risk Requirements on Banks
Constraints of Consistent Operational Risk Measurement and Regulation: Data Collection and Loss Reporting
Constraints of Operational Risk Measurement and the Treatment of Operational Risk Under the New Basel Framework
From Operational Risk to Operational Excellence
By Paolo Vanini, Markus Leippold, ...
The Treatment of Operational Risk Under the New Basel Framework - Critical Issues