Finadium
0
Product was successfully added to your cart
  • Finadium
  • SFM Home
  • About SFM
  • Events
  • Webinars & Podcasts
  • SFM Magazine
  • Fintech Capital Markets
  • Login
  • SUBSCRIBE RSS
​

Do EU margin requirements on anti-procyclicality for CCPs help or hurt risk management?

January 15, 2018Jonathan Cooper

EMIR wants CCPs to hold more margin, in effect making CCPs into virtual fortresses. But the costs associated are high and the potential to push risk into markets or firms is real. We examine ESMA’s latest consultation paper draft on anti-procyclicality margin measures for CCPs to better understand EU regulatory thinking.
This content requires registration. Get access today by signing up here.

Related Posts

  • What's the real risk of CCPs, counterparty risk or liquidity risk?
    August 7, 2017
  • New collateral regimes create new systematic risks through the collateral markets
    February 22, 2017
  • Should CCP default reserves be funded by debt or securitization?
    August 17, 2016
Previous post Northern Trust moving Citadel’s tech in-house Next post The Minneapolis Fed wants a 15% Leverage Ratio and a 1.2% tax on secured financing. That’s one way to reduce risk…

Click here to cancel reply.

SUBSCRIBE or Register for Free Access
  • Subscribe for access
  • Register for free to view non-premium content

Member Login

Forgot Password?
Create an Account
​
  • About Us
© 2018 Securities Finance Monitor. All Rights Reserved.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
All Articles
News and Notes
Basel III
CCP
Collateral Management
Derivatives
Featured
Liquidity Management
Regulatory
Repo
Securities Lending
Shadow Banking