If Amazon did T+1 Settlement: How Post-Trade Operations Are Moving Towards Real-Time Control

From monitoring bank balances to tracking package deliveries, we’ve grown accustomed to having information at our fingertips. But what about the state of post-trade operations in the capital markets? As regulations tighten and demands for efficiency are increased by the transition to one-day settlement cycles in US securities, the need for real-time visibility and control in post-trade operations is becoming paramount.

 

The act of onboarding clients and the processes around trade allocation, confirmation and affirmation are unlikely candidates for headlines about transformative technology innovation when pitched against the thrill of front office trading and the excitement that AI and blockchain technologies still generate. And usually they can’t compete – even if all institutional trading relies on the efficient and robust running of post-trade systems behind the scenes.

But this year is post-trade’s time to shine. The SEC’s decision to shorten settlement times to T+1 has sparked a rush of interest in the sector: once the bonnet was opened, market participants started wondering if it was time for a full vehicle inspection. Even though the focus of the regulation for T+1 settlement is securities, there is an indirect effect on FX and fixed income too, and many firms are now taking an holistic view on operations processes across all asset classes. Shorter FX trading-settlement timeframes reduce the window for resolving issues, necessitating efficient and timely technical account onboarding, data completion, and issue escalation, especially given the complex, multi-regional nature of cross-asset processes.

Our Onboarding, Connectivity and Operations service enhances post-trade operations and connectivity, enabling clients to efficiently monitor and manage their networks. Just as your smartphone app keeps you informed about your financial health and the whereabouts of your Uber ride, post-trade operations now require a similar level of real-time transparency and accessibility at a time when supervisors’ stance towards operational challenges is becoming increasingly unforgiving. The pressure is on for banks and investment managers to demonstrate full control over their post-trade processes. Like tracking your Uber’s journey, operational teams need to know where trades stand, identify bottlenecks and errors, and take proactive measures to ensure timely settlement.

Regulation and oversight as key drivers

A single change in the overall financial market ecosystem often has ripple effects across the whole network, with some consequences more noticeable than others.

In the case of moving to a 50% shorter settlement time for US securities, market participants in FX will have 83% less time to perform post-trade processes than in the current regime, according to calculations from industry association AFME.(Source)

Another key consideration is whether the shorter timeframe will affect performance, or in other words whether the risks of failed trades and operational errors would increase. The short answer, according to both AFME and buy-side industry participants, is an overwhelming yes.

Post-trade efficiency is firmly in the sights of regulators and industry oversight bodies. In currency markets, the FX Global Code of Conduct is calling for better operational processes, including more timely confirmations as well as a general technology upgrade to increase efficiency and accuracy. The standard-setting body for OTC derivatives, ISDA, continues to focus on give-ups and the timings associated with communications around them.

In European securities markets, the settlement discipline regime of the Central Securities Depositories Regulation (CSDR) has introduced several measures to reduce the number of settlement fails, to prevent such failures and to cajole market participants into settling accurately on the intended dates.

In the futures markets, FIA and DMIST, the Derivatives Market Institute for Standards, jointly announced the publication of the Final Standard for Improving Timeliness of Trade Give-Ups and Allocations, designed to improve the delivery and processing of allocation instructions by establishing 30-minute timeframes for completing steps in the allocation process .

In summary, regulators and oversight bodies are quite clear in their messaging to market participants: operational failures such as trade breaks, and system outages will be met with a zero-tolerance policy from rule makers, and full historical post-trade transparency and visibility is a must.
.

Change for the better: real-time service monitoring and more

To comply with these rules, market participants need to have more granular visibility into what happens to trades after execution, which in turn requires infrastructure and service providers to step up their game in areas such as flexibility of access, onboarding and integration, among others. That means it’s all eyes on onboarding, connectivity and operations.

Achieving this operational upgrade is more complicated than it sounds, due to the complexity of the post-trade ecosystem and the varying levels of technology requirements participants have. Legacy and fragmented post-trade infrastructures across multiple systems and vendors have to be consigned to the past in favour of a single, more closely-coupled system.

It’s in everyone’s interest to have better visibility into the health of the systems, services and counterparties involved in the affirmation, matching, confirmation and clearing of trades. Consider your Fitbit alerting you when your heart rate spikes unexpectedly. Similarly, in post-trade operations, timely alerts and diagnostics are crucial for identifying and resolving issues before they escalate. Whether it’s pinpointing delays in trade processing or diagnosing connectivity issues with counterparties, the ability to swiftly address problems is vital. With T+1 settlement approaching, the stakes are higher than ever, akin to keeping a close eye on your health indicators to prevent potential complications and unpleasant surprises.

Just like we have become accustomed to skipping queues through self-service, banks and investment management firms are requesting greater autonomy with respect to the initial integration and technical onboarding of their systems and underlying clients through self-service tools. The expectation is that this should be combined with greater visibility into the health of their post-trade networks and services including the physical and logical connections used to carry messages between market participants, all supported by a comprehensive customisable reporting suite. This includes greater flexibility with respect to accessing services, which is fueling demand for Single-Sign-On (SSO) and operational dashboards driven by real-time data accessed via API.

In response, OSTTRA has developed a new service for its clients – OSTTRA’s Onboarding, Connectivity and Operations (OCO) Suite – enabling network participants to track the health of their post-trade operations across asset classes and counterparties. The initial release provides enhanced system monitoring:

OSTTRA for Onboarding, Connectivity and Operations provides granular visibility into what happens to trades after execution.

Get granular visibility into what happens to trades after execution with OSTTRA OCO.

 

While the cost of operational failures has never been higher, regulatory and supervisory forces are combining with business needs to create an unusually difficult landscape to navigate. This is why market participants need to move towards a single screen to view operational processes and away from the current, fragmented approach.

This desire is reflected in the exchange traded derivatives (ETD) market, according to the findings of a March 2024 listed derivatives study, produced by Acuiti in association with OSTTRA: Almost 90% of ETD market participants surveyed said that it would be either crucially or very important to have a consolidated view of T+0 and T+1 processes, a desire particularly evident among the sell-side. The biggest benefits of such a view would be in risk reduction according to survey respondents, but there are also perceived upsides in operational efficiency and costs.

Clearly, as the industry prepares for an unyielding approach from regulators around trade breaks and systems down time, market participants need better visibility into the health of their systems, networks and trade status as well as an easier ride in terms of interacting with and managing processes.

When a Prime Experience Comes to Post-Trade Operations

Against an accelerated market dynamic, market participants want greater autonomy to go at the pace needed to bring solutions to market quickly. They are asking for the ability to use self-service tools during the initial integration and technical onboarding of their systems and underlying clients and they want to combine these with a greater level of visibility into post-trade networks and services, in a way that’s personalised and intuitive, just like the everyday instances of self-service we’ve all become used to.

After all, this already happens in other areas of life: the ability to track packages, taxis and food orders after the purchase is taken for granted in most customer-facing areas. Amazon customers rarely need to call the Amazon helpdesk because the service interface gives you all the info you need about your past and pending orders, orders currently out for delivery, mechanisms for raising queries and product how-to features, among other things.

For post-trade, this means an increased granularity and visibility into connections that handle messages between participants, both physical and logical, and a comprehensive and customisable monitoring suite. There is also growing demand for creating a Single Sign-On entry point for services in the same bucket to streamline workflows and step-up efficiencies.

Abundant data and the ability to easily channel information through automatic API connections has given rise to expectations that processes and exceptions should be viewed in real-time in a convenient format such as a dashboard.

But it’s not just ease of access and user experience that’s driving the quest for efficiency in post-trade, and it’s not just regulatory change either. As large financial market players continue to face headwinds, even marginal improvements along the post-trade lifecycle can make a meaningful difference to balance sheets.

In the year ahead, these headwinds will persist, according to consulting firm Deloitte, which predicted in its 2024 outlook for financial services that “banks’ ability to generate income and manage costs will be tested in new ways” while noting that “multiple disruptive forces” are conspiring to reshape the foundations and the architecture of banking and the capital markets industry.

These factors are making it imperative for market participants to see and manage the whole picture, not just parts of the post-trade jigsaw puzzle. It’s a small surprise, then, that Acuiti’s study predicts a push towards consolidation of vendors and processes, as market participants strive to reduce complexity. The survey found that the overwhelming majority of companies are now looking to consolidate their relationships with vendors to those that can offer comprehensive post-trade services covering the full lifecycle of trades.

What It Takes To Turn Post-Trade Into A Five-Star Rated Experience

Just like when you decide to cancel your booked Uber ride when your driver is stuck in unexpected traffic, market participants should be notified about any and all events that impact trade matching. Factors to monitor should include physical and logical connectivity, system outages, platform performance as well as failed and pending messages, which impact match statuses, trades processed and associated market participants.

Trades could fail for a variety of reasons but market participants get little actionable information about such events at the moment. Better visibility into what happens to trades before they arrive at the back office is one of the key areas where there is demand for improvements, especially if there are operational reasons involved in a failure.

Rather than just identifying that there is a discrepancy, market participants should be able to tell which trades are having issues due to operational reasons and where those problems are before failures happen. The ability to see in real-time the status and health of trades as they traverse trade lifecycles and ecosystems would reduce the chances of errors creeping in unnoticed and resulting in failures or broken trades.

Similarly, dealing with exceptions should be easier and solved in a way that allows firms to track, manage and resolve these issues as soon as possible and in a structured manner. Automating incident management and allowing both parties to track them, enhancing both inter- and intra-company collaboration and enabling remediation are actionable steps for the industry.

Reporting is also ripe for upgrades and it’s an area where market participants would benefit from better visibility into operational and trade level metrics as well as the ability to compare and benchmark firm-level performance against peers. Having more control and autonomy over the format and frequency of these summaries and insights would allow institutions more flexibility to prove good performance and regulatory compliance.

Standardising how post-trade information is accessed and distributed is also something where efficiency gains need to be made. Adopting API connectivity for post-trade workflows and operational data access would significantly upgrade the quality of the user experience and increase the utility of the data and information.

These are just some of the examples that could benefit the overall ecosystem and promote the health of both the post-trade networks and its participants. The Onboarding, Connectivity and Operations service for OSTTRA clients aims to address this challenge by offering a seamless way of increasing transparency and control of post-trade operations:

OSTTRA for Onboarding, Connectivity and Operations

What three words for the post-trade path ahead: volatility, risk and control

Equity markets are surging to new highs and risky assets continue to remain buoyant despite interest rates in major economies staying at multi-decade highs. The approval of Bitcoin ETFs has launched crypto on Wall Street for real, in a year when the world’s population is heading into a record number of elections. Rate cuts, new dynamics in some markets and quite a lot of event risk are conspiring to lay the groundwork for elevated volatility.

For traders, this is great news because high volumes and volatility promise the possibility of rich pickings. From an operational point of view, it’s a more mixed outlook that will be about balancing the need to manage operational risk with the need to heed the shareholder call to achieve operational efficiencies that shore up margins.

As this financial landscape evolves rapidly over the next year, the accelerated evolution of post-trade towards on-demand operational insight and real-time monitoring is not merely a regulatory necessity but a strategic business imperative. Just as we rely on seamless digital experiences in our daily lives, financial institutions must adapt to this new paradigm: Instantaneous visibility and control aren’t just conveniences; they’re essential tools for mitigating risk, ensuring compliance, and optimising performance. With T+1 settlement leading the charge, the push for transparency and efficiency will extend beyond equities to encompass other asset classes like FX and fixed income, and far beyond the borders of the United States of America, with post-trade pundits expecting a move to T+1 in the UK and the EU in 2025.

Learn more

Our OCO suite helps OSTTRA clients improve operational control and reduce operational risk through the delivery of automated service connectivity, self-service onboarding, real-time service monitoring and exception management, and customisable reporting. To find out more, please visit OSTTRA for Onboarding, Connectivity & Operations.

Firms Seek Optimisation Gains as UMR and SA-CCR Bite

A wider range of market participants is taking advantage of service providers such as OSTTRA’s optimisation cycles to drive margin and counterparty credit risk efficiencies across asset classes including FX, rates, equities, commodities and credit.

With the transition to a new capital regime on counterparty risk and uncleared financial instruments largely complete, in the past year, market participants have increasingly turned to service providers such as OSTTRA to reduce gross notional and counterparty exposure in the most efficient manner.

Since the last phase of the uncleared margin rules (UMR) was rolled out in September 2022, coupled with the shift from the current exposure model to the standardised approach to counterparty credit risk (SA-CCR), market participants across most jurisdictions have been compelled to closely monitor their exposure to each counterparty to minimise the amount of initial margin they would potentially need to post.

“Through our services, clients can significantly optimise counterparty credit risk across multiple bilateral relations without impacting their market risk profiles,” says Christina Högegård, Business Manager, triBalance and triReduce at OSTTRA. “In doing so they reduce their initial margin under UMR, their cleared initial margin and their capital requirements under SA-CCR and the internal models method (IMM).

“By regularly using a service like OSTTRA triBalance, our clients can continuously lower the amount of margin they need to post. Optimising their exposures across multiple counterparties means they can reduce the amount of regulatory capital held for that purpose, freeing it up for use elsewhere,” she explains.

Until recently, optimising counterparty risk was largely the concern of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs). As more firms are captured by UMR and with the new capital regime in place, that concern has filtered down to smaller sell side players that have joined OSTTRA’s network in growing numbers over the past year. The buy side is also showing increased interest in optimisation.

By connecting G-SIBs with wider banking, buy-side and central counterparties across its global network, OSTTRA helps market participants optimise capital allocation and counterparty credit risk across a range of asset classes including FX, rates, equities, commodities and credit. Interest has grown – particularly among market participants with significant exposure to the rates and FX markets, as record breaking optimisation cycles in these asset classes are regular occurrences.

Optimisation runs

To generate the best results, market participants take part in regular optimisation runs, the frequency of which depends on the asset class they wish to optimise. The most frequent runs are conducted for FX, and participants can optimise initial margin, leverage ratios or risk-weighted assets – or all three at the same time.

Frequency is driven by demand and is based on what market participants feel works best for the exposures they have in a particular asset class. So, currently, rates run bimonthly, equities monthly and credit runs on an ad hoc basis.

“With weekly FX optimisation runs, we give participants the opportunity to optimise initial margin frequently and see that the benefits last for some time. Some choose to optimise weekly and some less frequently. In addition to initial margin, they can also optimise SA-CCR and IMM [exposures] in the same runs, as often as they wish,” says Högegård.

“The incremental benefit of optimising more frequently needs to be weighed against the resources used and additional notional put on. However, the benefit is greatest the day after the optimisation run and, with a fully automated process, participants could optimise every day.”

At the start of a run, market participants upload the exposures they wish to optimise to the OSTTRA triBalance portal along with any conditions they would like to apply. An optimisation algorithm analyses clients’ chosen exposures and provides them with a detailed proposal outlining how their portfolio can best be optimised according to their requirements. Each optimisation run will typically start and be finalised within half a day.

The potential for optimisation of any given portfolio is contingent on its inherent composition, the asset classes involved and on the directionality of the trades. On the back of increased volatility and high interest rates, the optimisation potential of each run increases accordingly.

“Regardless of their motivation for using our services, the ability to face as many counterparties as possible is important in terms of getting the most out of the service,” concludes Högegård.

OSTTRA was named Best compression/optimisation service for FX at the FX Markets e-FX Awards 2023.

To find out more, contact info@osttra.com.

Combined 24hr FX Optimisation and Compression cycles

OSTTRA is now running FX optimisation and compression cycles together within 24 hours. Customers can optimise on multiple risk factors simultaneously whilst also benefiting from  compression to minimise gross notional.

 

Changes in capital regulation taking effect:

Over the course of 2022 we saw an increased client focus on optimising using risk-based capital models (SA-CCR & IMM), as well as on reducing SIMM and CCP IM using the OSTTRA  triBalance service. However, overlay trades to optimise these risk objectives are notional additive, and gross notional reduction remains relevant for many participants.

By combining compression and optimisation, we can offer customers a solution that provides optimisation of multiple risk factors including SA-CCR, RWA, UMR IM, gross notional, and more, all within a 24 hour window.

 

 

Benefits:

 

To discuss your FX optimisation needs, contact info@osttra.com.

OSTTRA Capital Optimisation – Now with SwapAgent

We are pleased to announce that the OSTTRA triBalance Capital Optimisation service is now live with SA-CCR optimisation of settled-to-market netting sets by proposing new overlay trades designated into SwapAgent. This functionality is now available in both our Interest Rate and FX optimisation runs.

In December last year we completed the first Interest Rate cycle where we optimised bilateral and cleared exposures alongside participants settled-to-market exposures. The first FX cycle to include SwapAgent overlay trades followed shortly thereafter and was completed in January.


“Leveraging SwapAgent and its STM procedures presents new opportunities for our clients to further reduce capital costs under SA-CCR.”
Christina Högegård, Business Manager OSTTRA triBalance

 


Counterparty credit risk impacts a firm’s cost of trading due to capital requirements, driven by RWA and Leverage Ratio, and funding costs driven by Initial Margin. We are running frequent optimisation cycles in both FX and Interest Rates where our customers can proactively manage RWA and Leverage Ratio requirements, calculated using SA-CCR or Internal Model Method, while simultaneously optimising Initial Margin

 

Semi-annual FX and interest Rate Capital Optimisation

 


“We welcome OSTTRA triBalance using SwapAgent’s risk management and standardisation process for the bilateral market as a building block in their margin and capital optimisation.”
Nathan Ondyak, Global Head of SwapAgent

 


To discuss your capital optimisation needs, contact info@osttra.com.

 

FCMs tap OSTTRA for FX Client Clearing

FCMs continue to expand their use of OSTTRA Clearing Connectivity and OSTTRA LimitHub as a result of increased demand for FX Client Clearing. Adoption of the FX service allows FCMs to take advantage of cross-asset CCP Connectivity, at what could prove to be an inflection point for FX clearing as volumes continue to increase. The FCM can provide pre-trade or post-trade approval for FX, regardless of whether trades are executed in a cleared liquidity pool, and/or off venue.

“We’re pleased that our clearing connectivity and credit risk services are helping more firms adopt client clearing, in the face of UMR and additional capital efficiency drivers.”
Steve French, Commercial Lead, FX and Securities – OSTTRA

The OSTTRA Clearing Connectivity service supports the full clearing lifecycle from trade submission to trade novation, including the client trade take-up workflow used by an FCM in conjunction with OSTTRA LimitHub. Established in 2013 in response to CFTC regulations, the OSTTRA LimitHub service supports both pre and post-trade limit checking for OTC cleared instruments including Rates, CDS and FX NDFs and is utilised by 18 FCMs supporting 900 Clients across 24 trading venues, at 5 CCPs.

“UBS chose to adopt the OSTTRA Clearing Connectivity and OSTTRA LimitHub services as part of our workflow for ForexClear transactions to streamline and scale up clearing processes as part of our Next Generation platform integration.”
Nick Short, ETD Client Consulting – UBS

 

For more information on OSTTRA LimitHub, click here or contact us at info@osttra.com.

Managing CCR to reduce the all-in cost of OTC derivatives portfolios

There are a multitude of risk factors that contribute to the cost of trading OTC derivatives and maintaining a derivatives portfolio over time. As the industry transitions to the risk-based calculation method for capital requirements, referred to as SA-CCR, or Standardised Approach to Counterparty Credit Risk, we examine how counterparty credit risk contributes to these costs by highlighting the intricacies involved in OTC credit risk management.

The importance of managing counterparty credit risk effectively became evident during the financial crisis 14 years ago. It subsequently became a central theme in the regulatory changes that followed, including mandatory central clearing, the requirement to secure non-cleared exposures via Variation Margin (VM) and Initial Margin (IM), and, most recently, the implementation of the updated capital regime, SA-CCR. Over time, each of these regulatory initiatives has increased the cost of counterparty credit risk, in turn incentivising effective risk management and proactive mitigation.

Mandatory clearing has made the financial markets more resilient by ensuring that liquid and vanilla risk is centralised, netted down, and facing a financially robust counterparty. However, risk exposures that were traditionally intended to hedge one another but originated from different product types is sometimes scattered between different netting sets, resulting in fragmentation since not all products are eligible, or indeed suitable, for clearing.

The advent of Uncleared Margin

After the introduction of the mandatory clearing rule, regulatory focus switched to the mitigation of bilateral risk, with firms required to exchange margin with their counterparties. This became mandatory for the largest firms in the first wave of the Uncleared Margin Rules (UMR) in 2016/17. UMR thrust counterparty risk back into the spotlight and the cost of funding initial margin has become a real consideration when maintaining an OTC portfolio.

Many of the most active FX trading participants witnessed their initial margin requirements quickly growing since FX positions are typically fragmented across many currency pairs, multiple counterparties and have historically only been cleared or netted to a limited extent. The UMR product scope differentiated between FX products, specifically those with and without physical delivery. This, again, impacted well managed netting sets as non-deliverable risk from FX instruments now attracted bilateral margin, whilst deliverable FX risk did not.

This encouraged the industry to reduce risk using a combination of pre- and post-trade optimisation tools, as well as promoting scalable initiatives to help achieve this. The resulting solutions optimise risk allocation between bilateral counterparties and the CCP(s), which reduces the size of margin calls and the associated funding costs. The clear benefits of these new multilateral services resulted in rapid adoption and incorporation into the banks’ daily operations. These initial solutions were very efficient, given the focus was purely on counterparty credit risk, and left market risk unchanged. In FX products alone, the cost savings achieved through the optimisation of credit risk amounts to savings exceeding USD 100 million annually.

 

 

Adoption of the SA-CCR capital regime

The recent introduction of SA-CCR as the standard capital measure for calculating counterparty credit risk altered the dynamics of FX credit risk again, adding another dimension to be considered when minimising the all-in-cost of trading. Existing risk management and optimisation solutions have been extended to include the additional complexity, and new solutions such as selective post trade novation, compression and clearing have been, and continue to be, analysed.

Actively managing FX exposures and counterparty risk for UMR and/or SA-CCR, or concentrating exposures by clearing, can reduce the associated risks and costs. However, the complexity of managing multiple measures and different types of netting-sets all need to be considered simultaneously if firms are to achieve the objective of minimising all-in derivative portfolio costs.

 

 

UMR and SA-CCR are both driven by counterparty credit risk, and each of them affects the cost of trading FX. They are interconnected and cannot be considered in isolation – active risk mitigation in one risk measure may result in an adverse impact on the other. They need to be addressed in tandem, not only because of their similarities but also because there are some important differences that are unique to the FX market:

Managing the all-in cost of capital associated with OTC derivatives

FX exposures can, for the benefit of both UMR and SA-CCR or IMM, be simultaneously and independently optimised by leveraging the differences in instrument coverage. Clearing increases netting efficiency, reducing the size of outstanding exposures whilst causing deliverable FX transactions to attract additional margin requirements. These incremental costs must be considered when seeking to optimise the all-in cost of maintaining FX exposures via redistribution of counterparty risk, clearing, novation etc. These methods can all be used in isolation, but the best outcome is achieved when applied together to optimise and minimise the all-in cost.
Although some of these properties are specific to the FX market, others are common across asset classes. In interest rate markets for example, mandates have driven the majority of trades into clearing and the instrument scope for SIMM and SA-CCR is the same – thus the optimisation characteristics differ from the FX market.
There are also differences specific to individual firms that can be highlighted, and are important to consider when seeking to actively manage risk to reduce the all-in cost of counterparty credit risk:

Summary – Significant complexity

The regulatory regime that governs counterparty credit risk contains multiple interdependent measures, applying to similar exposures, which must be considered in totality to avoid an undesirable outcome.
In reality, banks and firms are domiciled in different jurisdictions, have varying levels of portfolio complexity, and different funding costs. All these factors need to be managed concurrently when optimising counterparty credit risk and regulatory costs associated with OTC portfolios.
Complexity is high. To maximise the benefit of actively managing counterparty risk, firms need to apply their own individual preferences and drivers while simultaneously accounting for differences between UMR and SA-CCR, and bilateral and cleared exposures, for all the individual asset classes.
Given counterparties monitor risk in different ways, it is important to manage and optimise counterparty credit risk:

Explore our Counterparty Risk Optimisation Service and learn more about our SA-CCR solutions.

Optimising Your Business Under the SA-CCR

The implementation of the SA-CCR has significant implications for the way that banks run their swaps trading businesses. A holistic approach to assessing counterparty credit risk is required to replace the existing focus on gross notional, resulting in a totally different approach for calculating how much capital needs to be held. This means that banks need ways to reduce their counterparty exposure to maintain profitability and remain competitive.

Our panel of experts consider the SA-CCR regulations and what they mean for participants in the OTC derivatives market, and take a closer look at the solutions available for proactive optimisation.

OSTTRA sees 30.6% hike in NDF clearing volumes in H1 2022

Uptick is driven by UMR as well as volatility due to the war in Ukraine, with new interest from buy-side firms driving dealer activity.

 

The number of cleared non-deliverable forwards (NDFs) processed by OSTTRA Clearing Connectivity for FX has increased by almost a third this year, up from 4% YoY 2019 to 2020. Data by OSTTRA, an end-to-end trade-processing provider, also showed the volume of cleared NDF trades rose to a record high of 213,150 in March this year, with additional volatility due to macro events, particularly the conflict in Ukraine, contributing to this.

Overall, year-to-date, OSTTRA processed a monthly average of 180,559 NDF trades. The volume showed continued growth in 2022, with trades up 30.6% in the first half of 2022, compared to the same period in 2021. Ukraine related volatility only accounts for a relatively small portion of this growth: even when excluding the record-breaking March figures, monthly average NDF clearing volumes are up 25.8% in the first half of 2022, compared to the same period in 2021.

What’s driving the growth in NDF trading and clearing? Clue: three letters, six phases
OSTTRA’s analysis of trading and clearing volumes has found that each phase of Uncleared Margin Rules (UMR) correlates directly to volume growth. As UMR Phase 5 was postponed in 2020, the growth is reflected in 2021, where we see an increase of 28% versus 4% in 2020. While we saw volatility spikes, NDF growth has been steady and generally driven by UMR phases. With the deadline for the final phase of UMR – phase 6 – looming on September 1 this year, firms will need to keep a close watch on their trading activity in order not to breach the $50m UMR threshold.

Who’s driving the growth in NDF trading and clearing? Rounding up the usual and some new suspects
OSTTRA’s Patrick Philpott comments: “NDF Volume on OSTTRA Clearing Connectivity for FX is driven by large dealers. However, there are also some new participants over the period we analysed. These are mainly regional banks and investment management firms looking to gain an edge by clearing their FX portfolios. These firms are distributed globally and include companies in Asia and Australia as well as UK and Americas-based firms, with the market on the European continent being somewhat slower.”

Overall, Philpott explains, there is a clear uptick in buy-side interest in NDF clearing. Block and allocation workflows are a pain point for which buy-side firms are increasingly seeking solutions. While these are not yet a requirement for asset managers, they are expected to be a requirement for hedge funds if they start to clear. OSTTRA Trade Manager is increasingly being adopted by investment managers, and OSTTRA has already developed a block allocation solution for hedge funds.

Investment Management adoption is also driving additional dealers to clear NDFs, in response to large asset managers wanting to trade with them and clear. Philpott predicts that Canadian dealers will also start to clear this year.

How does OSTTRA support market players with the post-trade processing of NDFs?
OSTTRA’s clearing connectivity enables sell-side and buy-side firms to submit trades directly to leading CCPs, without the need to build out direct clearing connectivity. Against the background of UMR, more firms now seek to optimise their balance sheet by clearing more of their FX trades. OSTTRA provides a timely and scalable NDF clearing facility.

For more information on OSTTRA Clearing Connectivity, please contact us at info@osttra.com.

Best compression/optimisation service for FX at FX Markets e-FX awards 2020

As regulations targeting over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives continue to unfold and increase the pressure on portfolios, participants in the FX market are increasingly turning to services that will help them reduce their cost of capital and manage their exposure to counterparties.

As the volume of OTC FX derivatives trading has picked up in recent years, compression and optimisation have emerged as invaluable tools for enhancing capital efficiency and managing credit risk without fundamentally changing participants’ market positions.

At OSTTRA, a market-leading post-trade risk management service provider, the use of these services has seen phenomenal growth.

 

As regulations targeting over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives continue to unfold and increase the pressure on portfolios, participants in the FX market are increasingly turning to services that will help them reduce their cost of capital and manage their exposure to counterparties.

As the volume of OTC FX derivatives trading has picked up in recent years, compression and optimisation have emerged as invaluable tools for enhancing capital efficiency and managing credit risk without fundamentally changing participants’ market positions.

At OSTTRA, a market-leading post-trade risk management service provider, the use of these services has seen phenomenal growth.

On the compression side of the business, $11 trillion worth of gross notional was processed through the firm’s OSTTRA triReduce service in the past 12 months, with a record $4.9 trillion compressed in the fourth quarter of 2019 alone – 153% above the previous quarterly high achieved in Q3 2018.

In a compression cycle, a set of forward and swap trades are eliminated and replaced with new transactions with a combined gross notional equalling less than the original combined gross, thus reducing costs without changing overall market risk positions. Depending on their requirements, market participants can prioritise certain objectives for each cycle, such as gross notional reduction or net FX delta optimisation for the standardised approach to counterparty credit risk (SA-CCR), leverage ratio or risk-weighted assets.

The recent uptick in volumes compressed is largely due to more banks joining our FX network, with approximately 30 globally systemic important banks (G-Sibs) now on board.

“It’s a network-based service,” explains Mattias Palm, head of OSTTRA triReduce FX at OSTTRA, “so the more relationships that are involved in the service, the greater the reduction in counterparty exposure will be.
But we’ve also seen participants become more mature in their use of the service. They’ve grown accustomed to tailoring their risk tools and fine-tuning their settings to improve their results dramatically.”

This, he says, is because banks have made the necessary technological investments to centralise their portfolio, thus enabling them to compress more trades on their
global book. Additionally, many of them have also integrated their prime brokerage services into the network.

And, with a large portion of the interbank market participating, the network becomes more attractive to smaller market participants.

While most of the compressed volumes are largely made up of continuous linked settlement (CLS) currencies, the return of volatility to FX markets in 2020 has highlighted the settlement risk associated
with non-CLS emerging market currencies.

Consequently, demand for compression cycles involving the offshore renminbi, the Russian ruble and the Turkish lira, among others, is on the up.

“The volumes are small, but the impact of each exposure is so much bigger,” says Palm. “That’s something that the market learned with Turkey earlier this year when it went from stable to unstable very quickly.”

Amid this turbulence in FX markets, OSTTRA maintained a consistent service without any system failures.

“This is really important,” says Phil Junod, head of OSTTRA triReduce and OSTTRA triBalance business management at OSTTRA. “The industry was faced with a unique set of events. Market volatility was back, but all of our clients were faced with the challenge of working from home, so the fact we managed to keep the
service running without missing a beat and with full participation is very impressive.”

This consistency in service was true across all of our services, including optimisation. Launched in 2017, the firm’s OSTTRA triBalance service was set up to help market participants optimise their counterparty risk following the introduction of the uncleared margin rules (UMR).

“With greater attention to the SA-CCR over the past year, the capital regime focus is changing from gross notional to a riskbased approach,” says Erik Petri, head of OSTTRA triBalance solutions at OSTTRA.

As counterparty exposure is the centrepiece to both UMR and SA-CCR, OSTTRA triBalance’s weekly optimisation cycles prioritise rebalancing the credit relationship between counterparties. It does this, in part, by introducing short-term risk-reducing hedge trades across all relationships and asset classes with each participant remaining market risk neutral. “We have recently extended the OSTTRA triBalance solution to optimise
SA-CCR in addition to UMR, which is something that attracts a lot of interest and positive feedback.”

Having recently introduced gold to its OSTTRA triBalance cycles, market participants can now optimise initial margin between counterparties across equities, rates, commodities and FX. The impact of diminishing
counterparty risk is a reduction in the initial margin requirements.

With $7 billion to $10 billion dollars’ worth of FX-driven initial margin reduced on a continuous basis, Petri expects the network to continue to grow steadily, with the potential to double over the next
five years.

OSTTRA was voted best compression/optimisation service for FX at the 2020 FX Markets e-FX Awards.

Harnessing the benefits of more automated FX trade lifecycle operations

FX markets are unique not only in their scale but also in their complexity. There are multiple trading paradigms, and also multiple venues where trades may be executed. The FX ecosystem is highly fragmented and the case for more automation – more automated FX trade-lifecycle processes and procedures – has been clear for some time. And yet, automation hasn’t happened yet. Why not, and when will it happen? Steve French, Commercial Lead, FX and Securities at OSTTRA, writes about the challenges to automation, its benefits, and the key steps that firms should take on their journey towards implementing automation.

 

Inefficiency is an ever-present risk factor in FX trading and post-trade processing. This should be surprising, but it isn’t. FX markets are complex eco-systems in which the complexities arise from three main areas: first, there are the challenges associated with the need to support post-trade processing across the whole of the fragmented eco-system; secondly, there is the established practice of using multiple vendors and/or internal systems to support individual areas of the wider FX market; and finally, there is the related established practice of using multiple vendors and/or internal systems to support discrete aspects of the overall FX trade lifecycle.

All this adds up to a diverse matrix of processes and procedures that has evolved to handle, bluntly, anything that the FX market can throw at it. To cite just a few examples that illustrate the challenges facing the back office, some clients still book trades manually, and resort to fax and/or email confirmation. Some clients have no agreed protocol or method for responding to significant events – which is problematic for derivatives if not so much for cash markets. In cash, some bilateral trades are still being settled manually. There is widespread automation in FX, of course, but it falls significantly short of being universal.

The maxim “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” applies as well here as it did to stagecoach technology at around the time the first Model T Ford rolled off the production line. What’s to be done?

Putting the money up front

“Historically, investment has been focused on front-office activities. Since the financial crisis, regulatory conformance has taken a huge slice of IT budgets,” says Steve French. Back-office and supporting post-trade services have only received a small percentage of the IT spend. But the benefits of automation are increasingly being acknowledged: lower operational risks and avoidance of settlement failures; lower support and operational costs. Automated matching, confirmation and affirmation processes with a greater number of counterparties will also lower costs for intermediaries and execution providers and will provide a more streamlined flow of trades into settlement and clearing services

How, then, do we move forward?

First point: regulation facilitates automation. French says: “There’s an indirect impact of regulation whereby the costs associated with maintaining bi-lateral agreements with counterparties – and having to post VM for some FX instruments under UMR – are pushing more firms towards clearing, which will force standardized processes to emerge. We’re seeing an expansion of the number of FX instruments supported by central counterparties as well as the introduction of listed FX instruments, which some are using as alternatives to pure OTC FX market trading.”

There’s also some pressure from other asset classes. French continues: “Messaging standards that have been adopted in other asset classes are now gaining traction in FX. This will benefit firms which have systems that support these standards. The increased adoption of messaging standards like FIX and the implementation of FX affirmation and allocation workflows between suitably equipped market participants has created a degree of conformity for some scenarios in the FX markets that we have seen in the equities space.”

In terms of moving forward, there are signs are that FX-market demand for universal automation is beginning to be met. One of the main criticisms of existing post-trade processes is the need for multiple connections with multiple vendors and multiple vendor processes. French says: “Being able to access multiple trade lifecycle management services through one connection is advantageous, as long as the vendor providing the consolidated solution has an established network of market participants and provides an open platform capable of supporting industry standard messaging protocols, third-party vendors and industry utilities such as clearing houses and trade depositories.”

Single-connection services are now available, as and as this suggests, vendors have a significant role to play in driving automation. This goes far beyond providing simple connectivity.

Intelligent solutions

Vendors, in fact, can play a key role in facilitating change. French says: “Vendors play an important role in their interaction with regulators and industry bodies, most importantly with respect to longer-term structural changes. They work hard to understand and interpret new initiatives and industry-body best practices – and regulations – and play a critical role in ensuring that market participants are aware of what is expected of them as part of any change.” As French emphasizes, change-driving solutions are often the result of a vendor’s interaction with their client base.

Historically, little attention has been paid to post-trade platforms across the FX market place, but today, vendors and their clients are closely focused on making processes more useful and efficient through the application of business intelligence. French says: “We’re now in a position where we can centralize a lot of the decision-making that has previously been managed independently by each market participant and realize intelligent post-trade processing.” Trades can be automatically routed only to those services required to conclude each given post-trade process and the cobweb of “if then else”-style decision-making logic can be replaced.

To end on a pragmatic note, firms with the most efficient pre- and post-trade processes are likely to appear more attractive to those clients who are themselves increasing automation within their own systems. So choose a vendor with an eye to the future. French says: “Vendors must have a track record of delivering solutions that work and which solve real-world problems as opposed to simply presenting concepts that don’t benefit a firm and that have not actually been delivered.”

French says: “Vendors must have a track record of delivering solutions that work and which solve real world problems as opposed to simply presenting concepts that don’t benefit a firm and that have not actually been delivered.”

For more information, explore our Trade Notification Service and learn more about our Give Up Messaging solutions.

Services