2017The Journal of Financial Market InfrastructuresRequires access

Managing market liquidity risk in central counterparties

Evangelos Benos, Pedro Gurrola-Pérez, Michael O. Wood

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

In the event of a clearing member’s default, and as part of its default management process, a central counterparty (CCP) will need to hedge the defaulter’s portfolio and close out its positions. However, the CCP may not be able to do this without incurring additional losses if the market is illiquid or the portfolio contains large, concentrated positions. To mitigate this liquidity risk, CCPs often require members to post additional collateral to the initial margin in the form of concentration add-ons. In the absence of a quantitative regulatory standard for calculating concentration add-ons, this paper discusses the different approaches to incorporating market liquidity risk within a CCP’s default waterfall and the challenges that these approaches pose.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In the event of a clearing member’s default, and as part of its default management process, a central counterparty (CCP) will need to hedge the defaulter’s portfolio and close out its positions. However, the CCP may not be able to do this without incurring additional losses if the market is illiquid or the portfolio contains large, concentrated positions. To mitigate this liquidity risk, CCPs often require members to post additional collateral to the initial margin in the form of concentration add-ons. In the absence of a quantitative regulatory standard for calculating concentration add-ons, this paper discusses the different approaches to incorporating market liquidity risk within a CCP’s default waterfall and the challenges that these approaches pose.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In the event of a clearing member’s default, and as part of its default management process, a central counterparty (CCP) will need to hedge the defaulter’s portfolio and close out its positions. However, the CCP may not be able to do this without incurring additional losses if the market is illiquid or the portfolio contains large, concentrated positions. To mitigate this liquidity risk, CCPs often require members to post additional collateral to the initial margin in the form of concentration add-ons. In the absence of a quantitative regulatory standard for calculating concentration add-ons, this paper discusses the different approaches to incorporating market liquidity risk within a CCP’s default waterfall and the challenges that these approaches pose.

Key concepts: Counterparty, Collateral, Market liquidity, Clearing, Portfolio, Business, Liquidity risk, Hedge

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Managing market liquidity risk in central counterparties — Research Paper | ScholarLens