ISDA protocol as an option - Risk article

Risk published today an article titled "Cherry-picking fears [...] Isda protocol and traders warn of gaming the system"

Some extracts of the article are:

"[...] may have realised that signing left them in a difficult commercial position as they’d effectively made a free offer for their counterparties to adhere to [...] if and when it suits them,” says [...]. “Yet those banks couldn’t force anyone to adhere or agree bilaterally to [...] – so the protocol was operating on a one-way basis [for them].”

this means the signed-up banks have essentially given clients a free option that allows them to cherry-pick by working out if they’re going to win by adhering to the protocol or not.

“Imagine you have a large portfolio involving two counterparties who are hedging each other, and your risk-sensitivity exposure is at zero. You have $1 billion coming in on one side and $1 billion coming out on the other side. You’re thus perfectly hedged – until one counterparty suddenly stops [...],” says [...].

“Some market participants haven’t signed up to the protocol as they don’t ever want to [...],” says [...]. “If you haven’t signed the protocol, then it allows you to game the system because you can look at your portfolio and decide whether it would be beneficial or not to sign.”

The withdrawal of some dealers might also dissuade some clients from signing up. A counterparty might have a balanced book of unresolved CSAs with its banks and may be overall neutral about adhering to the protocol but, says [...], “if adherence now will only resolve some of [...], then signing may complicate the situation for them”.



I could have written the same text, replacing the [...] with something related to ISDA fallback protocol.

By the way the article was about negative rates in CSA collateral remuneration. But the point is that if this one sided option is true for negative rate, it is true also for the fallback. I guess we will see more articles on that very soon, in line with my post "ISDA Fallback as an option.

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

A personal statement on the IOSCO Statement on Alternatives to USD Libor

IOSCO has issued a document called “Principles for Financial Benchmarks” in 2013. As such it acted as an (unofficial/unelected) lawmaker. On 3 July 2023, the same IOSCO issued a “ Statement on Alternatives to USD Libor ”. The Statement looks like a tribunal judgement from a trial with no public hearing, no witness, and no defense right from a tribunal with no mandate to judge. And publish on the day before Independence Day! Some personal comments on the document. Transparency The statement indicated “Administrators should consider whether to improve the transparency of their rates". The IOSCO document lack minimum transparency. It does not indicate in any way the “varying degrees of vulnerability of concern“ of the analysed benchmarks. The name of the benchmark are not even indicated. This creates a culpability by association to all non-SOFR benchmarks. The statement refers to a Review of Alternatives to USD Libor ; to my knowledge, the review itself is not available. The st
Read more