The CCP skin in the game debate continues: sources say it isn't helpful (Premium)

Banks and buy side firms have been calling for an increase to the slice of the risk waterfall stumped up by CCPs. They reckon this would make CCPs more resilient, and avoid tapping into mutualized resources in the event of a massive default. But some experts are saying that increasing CCPs’ share of “skin in the game” (SITG) won’t achieve risk objectives and will result in costlier clearing house fees.

Please to view this content. (Not a member? Subscribe Today!)

Related Posts

Previous Post
Rate games adding to the complexity in collateralized funding markets (Premium)
Next Post
Finadium releases analysis of Basel revisions to credit risk rules

Related Posts

You do not have permission to view the comments.

Please Login to post a comment


Reset password

Create an account