Compliance

01:49 PM
Daniel Parker, SunGard's Capital Markets Business
Daniel Parker, SunGard's Capital Markets Business
Commentary
50%
50%

Why Market Risk Systems Are Vital to Volcker Rule Compliance

The race is on to reconfigure or implement ongoing position management capabilities, specifically as it relates to extraneous agency positions, writes Daniel Parker of SunGard's capital market business in the second part of his series on the Volcker Rule.

On December 10, 2013, five U.S. financial regulators approved a game-changing series of new rules that prohibit a broad array of financial risk activities that contributed to the near collapse of the world's financial system in 2008.

Daniel Parker, SunGard's Capital Markets Business
Daniel Parker, SunGard's Capital Markets Business

Known as the Volcker rule and codified as part of the Dodd-Frank Act, the rule’s provisions are applicable to all U.S. depository institutions, including those affiliated with or regulated as banks. The final rule prohibits banking entities from engaging in proprietary or own-account trading of certain securities, derivatives and options, among other restrictions. However, there remains significant difficulty in distinguishing market-making activity from proprietary trading.

The final provisions of the Volcker rule are a clear game changer for banks and affiliates that are involved in market-making and related proprietary trading activities. The breadth of coverage is much broader than market participants expected, and, as a result, the race is on to reconfigure or implement ongoing position management capabilities, specifically as it relates to extraneous agency positions. In this context, extraneous positions are those positions that are not an exact duplication of the original transaction.

[For more on Enhanced Automation is Key for Banks Under the Final Volcker Rule, see Daniel Parker's related story.]

Specifically, the rule allows for conditional exceptions for certain market-making activities, such as securities underwriting. However, even within the context of underwriting, it is necessary for banks to make an independent and ongoing analysis of whether any reclassification or inadvertent activity pushes a seemingly exempt activity into a prohibited activity, and to what measured level or degree. This will require a reconfigured process for banks, if not an entirely new one.

This is because while securities and derivatives dealers may continue to act as principal when making markets under the exemption, and the final rule does not mandate any substantive shift toward an agency exclusive model, there is a prescribed convergence with elements of the market risk rule. From a practical perspective, the rule requires that the banks qualify risk mitigation measures and in some instances liquidate an interest attached to an identifiable position in a timely manner.

In addition, in the final Volcker rule, the U.S. regulators have jointly adopted a view that broadens the statutory definition of trading account. For instance, under the statutory text, a “trading account” is primarily intent determinative. However, under the final Volcker rule, a “trading account” includes any account holding a position of any financial instrument that is relevant under the market risk capital rules or one that hedges another trading account position.

The breadth of the regulatory definition also extends to any account of a registered securities dealer, swaps dealer or security-based swaps dealer, which is also generally aligned with market risk provisions.

Taken together, this means that internal automation must be capable of identifying all positions that are considered residual to the originating transaction and calibrating them to certain market risk factors.

It is likely that because the regulators have referenced the market risk rule in their guidance, the applicable market risk automation processes will, if properly scaled, accomplish the monitoring of the continually changing risk bank of any residual position.

Covered banks may consider leveraging their market risk framework to comply with or properly leverage the exemptions commensurate with the market-making provisions of the Volcker rule — specifically those residual positions that are “designed to reduce or mitigate identifiable risks.”

To comply with new Volcker rule requirements, the necessary automation should consist of: • Accurate and objective profiling of any residual position, including a determination of potential changing characterization of the position • Advanced screening capabilities that coexist with the market risk and liquidity factors in accordance with the final market risk rule • A multi-level classification structure that provides a real-time identification that concurrently satisfies both the Volcker requirements as well as the market risk rule provisions

—Daniel Parker is VP, solutions consulting, SunGard’s capital markets business.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
IvySchmerken
50%
50%
IvySchmerken,
User Rank: Author
12/17/2013 | 2:33:01 AM
re: Why Market Risk Systems Are Vital to Volcker Rule Compliance
Great piece on entangling the nuances of this nearly 1,000 page rule. The final Volcker Rule is broader and more complex than the original version. Apparently, a residual position, which can be from an agency trade for a customer, can push an exempt activity (i.e., hedging) into a prohibitive area. It seems like a lot of risk analysis is going to be needed here to calibrate the extraneous positions.
More Commentary
What Will the Financial Back Office of Tomorrow Look Like?
Asset managers are increasingly looking to automate their manual back office workflows. Confluence calls it the "back office revolution."
Bankrolling Technical Debt: A Financierís Guide
Technical debt represents the effort required to fix source code or application problems that put the business at risk.
Staying Ahead of the Game With Continuous Delivery
The need to develop better software faster is leading financial organizations to continuous delivery (CD), a practice pioneered by SaaS companies like Salesforce.
Shore Up Cyber Security Now
Knowing that a data breach can and will happen at some point, asset management firms can manage new operational and regulatory risk with a layered approach to cyber security.
Is Big Data a Problem or an Opportunity?
When it comes to data, financial services firms are, as a rule, quite circumspect. They fear cyberattacks, data theft, data loss, security breaches, data privacy, and human error.
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.