Industry confronts hard choices in CCP recovery debate

The topic of recovery and resolution planning has come to the boil in recent weeks, with widespread calls for CCP operators to contribute more of their own capital. But a range of possible recovery options is available, and there is still little consensus on the right approach. Tom Osborn reports


It is often said that learning to recover from mistakes is more important than trying not to make any at all, but critics of swap market clearing houses claim the sector has got it the wrong way round – investing heavily in the infrastructure required to clear swaps, while the resources and practices that would set them back on their feet after a heavy loss remain scarily inadequate.

At the core of the issue is how CCPs would recover from the default of one or more of their clearing members

Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.

To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact or view our subscription options here:

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to View our subscription options

Switching CCP – How and why?

As uncertainty surrounding Brexit continues and the impacts of Covid-19-driven market volatility are analysed, it is essential for banks and their end-users to understand their clearing options, and how they can achieve greater capital and cross…

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a 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 individual account here