Compliance

10:30 AM
Paul Jones
Paul Jones
Commentary
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Initial Margin: When Does More Turn Out to Be Less?

Changing margin regulations are set to affect the OTC derivative market, including initial margin risk models for non-cleared OTCs.

Just 36 percent of the initial margin (IM) posted by Lehman Bros at LCH was required to meet replacement and hedging costs of its portfolio. Many believe that the success of LCH in managing the Lehman default has led to both the regulatory push for central clearing and the application of CCP-style margining to the world of bilateral derivatives. Indeed, increasing the amount of collateral held against counterparty credit risk for non-cleared derivative seems consistent with the objective of ensuring the safety of the financial system.

Despite some perceived similarities, there are in fact some stark differences between IM within CCPs and the use of IM for non-cleared OTC derivatives. First in the complexity and liquidity of the products they margin, and second in the processes around which margin calls can be disputed.

Non-cleared derivatives are products that are too complex or too illiquid to clear and risk-manage within a CCP. The same risks that are currently borne by capital on banks’ balance sheets will have to be absorbed by collateral held in a custody account for IM. This means that the risk models that are used to calculate IM must handle many of the same exposures currently treated within banks’ internal capital models.

Banks’ internal capital models, which are based on Value-at-Risk (VaR), have come under significant scrutiny as many modelling assumptions failed and banks were regarded as undercapitalised as a result. An analysis by the BCBS in 2013 found a massive variation between different firms’ calculations on the same portfolio. For example, in a portfolio containing a two-year swaption on a 10-year interest rate swap, the largest VaR was five times greater than the smallest. 

Unexpected or erroneous margin calls on OTC derivatives can have serious effects by creating short-term liquidity squeezes, as was seen when AIG received $32 billion in margin calls in Q2 2008. In contrast to clearing, when the margin calculated by the CCP must be paid in order to avoid a default, counterparties that are unwilling or unable to meet margin calls may begin a dispute process. This can be time consuming and occasionally requires third-party intervention to provide independent margin calculations. 

Like capital models, IM models are based on a raft of assumptions. The variation of assumptions between firms could lead to an entirely new source of disputes due to the subjectivity of risk models and has led ISDA to spearhead a standardized IM model (SIMM). However, differences can still remain in terms of how firms calculate trade sensitivities or implement the model. Many participants see the need for a third party offering to resolve those differences and minimize disputes.

The challenges of initial margin risk models for non-cleared OTC are just one indication that changing margin regulations are set to have an impact on the OTC derivative market. The number of margin calls is set to increase very significantly, which will be onerous for large and small firms alike. Only time will tell whether the regulations have achieved their objective of reducing systemic risks or whether they have, as some fear, just created other unintended consequences.

Paul Jones is Director of Product Management at Markit Analytics and is responsible for the firm's regulatory analytics solutions. He has extensive experience in product strategy, financial engineering and derivatives risk management, and has worked in both market and credit ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
IvySchmerken
50%
50%
IvySchmerken,
User Rank: Author
7/29/2014 | 10:40:59 AM
Disputing a Margin Call on OTC Derivatives
Paul, Thank you for pointing out the differences in calculating initial margin for cleared vs. non-cleared OTC derivatives, which certainly  is a complex topic. I've seen various headlines speculating on the safety of CCP model, asking what if a counterparty defaults. From what you said, I gather that if a counterparty disputes an initial margin call, this will hold up payment to the CCP. Can this be risky to the entire CCP and its other participants?

In your second example, with non-cleared OTC derivatives, these instruments are too illliquid to be placed in a CCP. So it seems like the bank's balance sheets are still at risk. And with the non-cleared OTC derivatives, it seems that the banks themselves are calculating initial margin based on models standardized by ISDA, but there are still differences in calculations. Do you think enough risk has been taken out of the system?
PaulJ519
50%
50%
PaulJ519,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/30/2014 | 4:08:06 PM
Re: Disputing a Margin Call on OTC Derivatives
To your first point - It depends on how you define the word "dispute". In the strict definition you can't dispute a CCP margin call, you just pay and then challenge afterwards. This is a key difference relative to non-cleared derivatives.

To your second point - My view is that risk will never be fully removed as it is in the nature of our economic model and is required to support growth. The question is, where it sits - in end-users' balance sheets (eg if they stop hedging with OTC derivatives), on banks' balance sheets (which causes problems if they misprice and understate risks) or within CCPs.

Most often risk is not eliminated but transformed; for example, long-term credit risk may be turned into short-term funding liquidity risk through the use of collateral agreements. This type of risk may cause losses to be realised much more quickly, giving firms less time to respond. Warehousing illiquid assets is a core function of banks' balance sheets and regulators and banks work hard to ensure they are appropriately capitalised and managed.

 
PaulJ519
50%
50%
PaulJ519,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/1/2014 | 12:31:11 PM
Re: Disputing a Margin Call on OTC Derivatives
Thanks Ivy - your point about complexity is well made.

Allow me to clarify my wording - you cannot dispute ccp collateral calls - you must pay them otherwise you are in default. 

Once the bilateral margin rules for margin come into force in Dec 2015 and firms start to use risk model to calculate Intial Margin then disputes on illiquid derivatives could cause operational challenges which may in turn affect banks balance sheets.

 

 

 

 
IvySchmerken
50%
50%
IvySchmerken,
User Rank: Author
8/1/2014 | 12:37:21 PM
Re: Disputing a Margin Call on OTC Derivatives
Paul, Thank you for clarifying the word "dispute."

I was not clear if firms can actually disagree with or dispute their margin calls or collateral calls. I think your point t that risk is not eliminated but is transformed is an important one.
More Commentary
Gartner: 75% of Mobile Apps Will Fail Security Tests Through 2015
The rise of BYOD means enterprises must implement security testing and containment solutions, according to new Gartner research.
Chip & Pain, EMV Will Not Solve Payment Card Fraud
Switching to EMV cards will lower retail fraud, but it's not enough. Here's the good, the bad, and the ugly.
With UCITS V, $9T Isnít as Easy as It Used to Be
With UCITS V's restrictive remuneration rules and hidden costs, going global may get a little less attractive.
Banks to Increase IT Spend on Big Data Challenges, Finds Aite Report
Big data has presented the greatest challenges and dissatisfaction for banks, yet it is the most likely to see upward spending in the next two years.
Scotland Independence Vote: Haggis & Fragmentation
Scottish independence has far-reaching consequences for the global financial markets.
Register for Wall Street & Technology Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
Wall Street & Technology - July 2014
In addition to regular audits, the SEC will start to scrutinize the cyber-security preparedness of market participants.
Video
Stressed Out by Compliance, Reputational Damage & Fines?
Stressed Out by Compliance, Reputational Damage & Fines?
Financial services executives are living in a "regulatory pressure cooker." Here's how executives are preparing for the new compliance requirements.