This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Post-Trade | Clearing & settlement


he sleepy world of post-trade services is facing a root and branch shake-up. As new regulations, in the US and Europe, work their way onto the statute books, creating some hugely lucrative opportunities for some players and threatening the very survival of many more, competition in the clearing and settlement space has never looked so intense nor the future so unsure. “The complexity of the regulations, and the magnitude of potential change that impacts the entire global landscape generally, mean financial institutions are moving into uncharted water. There are few certainties about who will emerge as market winners,” says Saheed Awan, head of global collateral services, Euroclear. Squeezed in between a regulatory agenda focused on stoking up competition while reducing risk, and a voracious client appetite for products that optimise capital and asset holdings but at no extra cost, the post-trade institutions are having to think fast as the ground shifts beneath their feet. In the clearing market, the decision by


T


global regulators to drive OTC derivatives trade onto exchanges presents one of the biggest opportunities and threats to incumbent players. “With a new flow worth over $700 trillion, there’s a huge historic business opportunity here for clearers,” says Javier Tordable, CEO of technology provider Cinnober. “Not every incumbent clearer will be able to adapt their business model to cope with OTC complexities and some will stay focused on core business so I’m sure we’ll see new clearing houses enter the OTC business.” Recent announcements by NYSE Euronext and CME of plans to build new clearing facilities for derivatives in Europe are a sign more newcomers into the clearing space are on the way, says Tordable. However, growing competition in the clearing space is also being powered by another force. As regulations governing capital and liquidity requirements grow more stringent, so the clamour from banks, demanding interoperability between CCPs, gets louder. Interoperability between


Best Execution | Autumn 2012


CCPs, say advocates, cuts inefficiency and risk by allowing market participants to net and consolidate trades into one single obligation using one pot of margin and one set of procedures in a relationship with just one preferred CCP. It also exerts downward pressure on clearing fees by injecting greater competition between CCPs. Earlier this year, interoperability seemed to be an unstoppable market force after several trading venues, led by BATS Chi-X, opened the doors to four-way interoperability. In addition, the decision by EC regulators to block a mega-merger between NYSE Euronext and Deutsche Börse seemed to take the steam out of “vertical exchanges”, which restrict choice by forcing customers to drive trades through the exchange’s own CCP. “I’m not expecting the floodgates to


interoperability to open soon”, says Hugh Brown, director of UK markets at EMCF. “EMIR blesses interoperability but it doesn’t make it mandatory.” According to Tordable at Cinnober though, the pressure from market participants, gunning to consolidate their trade flows into just a handful of large, strong CCPs, will inevitably lead to more competition and consolidation. “We’re already seeing it with deals such as LSE’s recent acquisition of LCH.Clearnet.”


Rising competition though among CCPs


has fired up safety concerns in some quarters. “What the advent of OTC derivatives into clearing does is to migrate bilateral risk between market participants to the CCP. Is that risk going to be managed appropriately and will CCPs create additional systemic risk which could impact on other on-exchange business categories”, asks Ian


“I’m sure we’ll see new clearing houses enter the OTC business.” Javier Tordable, Cinnober


31


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84