FRAs moving to SPSs

Market is moving out of Forward Rate Agreements (FRA) with FRA Discounting settlement method to Single Period Swaps (SPS). Some statistics about this market move can be found in a recent blog by Clarus: Toxic FRAs, Fallbacks and Single Period Swaps

I'm glad to see that my warning from two years ago about the inadequacy for ISDA fallback for FRAs has made its way to an important market development. Early warning were published on this blog, in Consultation on IBOR fallbacks: Question 1 and later in quantitative finance on-line repositories and reported in the press in FRAs won’t work with standard Libor fallback, experts say.

This development is coming in parallel with the push by CCPs to move to OIS directly instead of ISDA-designed fallback. That proposal has been reported recently in the press and commented in a previous blog: Wow! - LCH plans Libor swap switch to RFRs.

Those those changes of market behavior is a further prove that the ISDA-designed fallback is not fit for purpose. It may solve some legal problems but it does not solve issues associated to the rational for the derivative market existence in the first place: risk management. If all market participants that have a choice flee in the face of the fallback like if it was the plague, it must mean something with respect to the fallback choice.

As usual, I'm ready to provide advisory service on why the fallback is not fit for purpose from a risk management perspective, why I predicted those movement for a long time and how end-users can also act in practice to avoid those issues. See my muRisQ Advisory website and in particular the LIBOR transition page.

Added 2020-12-22: The LCH proposal regarding FRAs can be found on their website, under LCH Circular No 4127

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multi-curve framework book: new edition in progress

Image
Subject: Interest Rate Modelling in the Multi-curve Framework: Foundations, Evolution, and Implementation It has been more than 10 years since I wrote the first edition of the multi-curve framework book. What happened in those 10 years? Why did it take me so long to start a new version? It took me roughly 10 years to write the first edition. The reason it took so long at that time, was that I did not know that I was writing it! I thought I was writing a couple of pages on an obscured and theoretical idea that there was not a `` one curve to rule them all '' but multiple curves. It turned out that it became the actual practice for very clear and important reasons. That was the excuse for the first edition, what is the excuse for the second edition? Since the first edition, many things happen, in particular: March 2015: BCBS - IOSCO: margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives and mandatory variation margin July 2017: The future of LIBOR -- actually it
Read more

Rigged: part 1 - Will there be a part 2?

Image
I have been reading book “Rigged: The Incredible True Story of the Whistleblowers Jailed after Exposing the Rotten Heart of the Financial” (Andy Verity, Flint, June 2023) for some time. It was published several month ago, but I just finished it. To my defence, I have to say that I don’t feel comfortable reading fiction where the “bad guys” are systematically winning by cheating. The book is the story of the miscarriage of justice done in the LIBOR manipulation story. The book content did not surprise me. For anybody having worked on a (swap) trading desk, it is clear that what was described by the accusation was impossible. It is not possible for some middle level trader to create a multi-year, multi-desk, multi-bank international conspiracy over open lines, broker lines, on open offices etc. without all around them, including compliance and senior management to be fully aware of what is going on. Moreover the regulators cannot be ignorant of the situation, except pleading complete in
Read more

Pertes de la BNB: c’était prévu et nous payons!

La BNB: 3 milliards de pertes et encore 6 milliards à venir. Voir par example l’article de l’Echo: La perte de la BNB a dépassé 3 milliards d'euros en 2023 . 1) C’était le but! C’était prévu! 2) Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? 3) Quatrième pouvoir? 1) C’était le but! Les achats d’obligations gouvernementales avaient pour but de diminuer le coût des emprunts pour les États concernés. Il y a bien sur la fiction que ce n’est pas du financement des états parce que les obligations sont achetées dans le marché secondaire aux banques commerciales. Une fiction car les banques commerciales; achètent ces obligations sur le marché primaire à un prix surévalué uniquement parce qu’elles savent qu’elles peuvent les revendre à un prix encore plus surévalué aux banques centrales. C’est d’une certaine façon un “pump and dump”. Si ce n’est que dans le “pump” le seul pompage est par les banque centrales et le reste sait que ce pump n’intervient que pour soutenir un actif de moindre qualité. Et
Read more