RegTech Intelligence

Legislative initiative: BCBS 239 (PERDARR - Principles for effective risk data aggregation and risk reporting)

The Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) final text was published in January 2016 by the Basel Committee (BCBS).  The aims of the FRTB BCBS standards are to better factor market risk into trading book risk models, and to prevent banks moving instruments between the trading book and the banking book in order to

JWG analysis. Eleven of the industry’s most high-profile trade associations and ISDA this week urged regulators to adopt consistent and harmonised trade reporting requirements across jurisdictions.  However, reporting rules are already on the books and the consequences are high for firms.   In part 1 of our analysis on reporting, published last week, we explored

JWG analysis. Catch phrases, like ‘caveat emptor’, have been the rallying cry of the financial industry for millennia.  In 2009, the G20 sought to change the status quo by introducing the notion of global transparency to all markets. After spending billions on the first wave of reporting, we are only now realising how difficult it

2015: time for your new operating model?

JWG analysis. 60 attendees across the buy and sell-sides came together at Markit’s seminar in Stockholm last month to discuss today’s industry challenges.  They concluded that a new focus on establishing a flexible banking operating model to meet both business and regulatory demands for data, processes and standards, is top on their wish list for 2015.

Risk off

This article originally appeared in the autumn 2014 edition of Markit Magazine.   JWG analysis. The Basel Committee’s principles for effective risk data aggregation and risk reporting (BCBS 239) may be among the least well known components of the post-financial crisis reform package. Yet they could ultimately bring about the most significant changes to the

JWG analysis. The BCBS appears to be putting the screws on national regulators to expand the scope of their Risk Data Aggregation Principles to affect more banks.  Now Singapore is the first to react. June has been a busy month for all regulatory agencies, and the BCBS is no exception.  With 3 consultations, 2 sets

JWG analysis. Without a consolidated viewpoint on what new risk data requirements mean, firms will be at a loss when it comes to determining best practice. We are in the middle of a massive, global industry transformation with many rulebooks. With divergent regulatory timelines, standards and existing data architectures a common and holistic ‘best practice’

Counterparty classification regimes, such as CRD IV and EMIR, give banks a good reason to centralise their reference data, and the BCBS’ Risk Data Aggregation Principles provide a clear framework for doing so. From 1 January 2014, under CRD IV, firms will need to calculate CVA and hold additional capital on all derivatives contracts.  However,

The European Banking Authority (EBA) has finally published its final draft Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) (here) on supervisory reporting for CRD IV. Long awaited, the technical standards set out the near-final reporting requirements, as part of COREP, for own funds, financial information, losses stemming from lending collateralised by immovable property, large exposures, leverage ratio and

Given the exponential growth of reporting requirements since the crisis, firms often ask: ‘Where does all this data go and who has the time to look through it all?’  In fact, recent statements by regulators have made this question all the more valid given that regulators’ data systems, it is increasingly apparent, often suffer from