CCP debate needs to go beyond skin in the game

Discussion needs to move on to how to keep markets functioning in a default

hands-together

So far the debate on clearing house sustainability has focussed narrowly on how much 'skin in the game' participants must have in order to absorb the impact of the default of one or more clearing members. However, to capture the true risk posed, this discussion must broaden to how these same participants are incentivised to maintain commitment to a clearing house through times of stress. If debate continues solely on how much more capital either a clearing member (CM) or central counterparty (CC

To continue reading...

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an indvidual account here: