Outsmarting counterparty risk with smart contracts
A digital transaction system developed by quants at DZ Bank could slash margin costs for derivatives
What if over-the-counter derivatives could be traded without any counterparty risk?
Post-crisis rules aimed at mitigating counterparty risk require them to be centrally cleared or bilaterally margined using regulator-approved models.
But there may be a simpler solution – using smart contracts and distributed ledger technology.
“We thought, can we redesign a derivative from the beginning, such that all those fixes are not needed?” says Christian Fries, head of model development at DZ Bank. “We did not try to replicate a classical derivative, but something that has the same cashflows, the same economics, but without all the complexity,” he explains.
Fries and Peter Kohl-Landgraf, a senior business analyst and digital officer in the capital markets trading department at DZ, propose a novel template for a smart derivatives contract that removes counterparty risk – along with the need for its mitigants – from a transaction.
“This paper shows how the digitisation of contracts may not only make the system more efficient, reconciliations less frequent and settlements quicker, but that it can also improve the risk profile of financial products,” says Massimo Morini, who leads the scientific co-ordination effort for Banca IMI in Milan.
Morini argues that a decentralised system could eliminate many of the complexities – such as valuation adjustments – associated with OTC derivatives. He laid some of the theoretical foundation for smart contracts used by Fries and Kohl-Landgraf.
The key innovation of their contract is the introduction of a pre-funding mechanism and deterministic termination procedure.
When entering the smart contract, counterparties agree to fund a margin amount based on the size of the potential transaction. The margin goes into each counterparty’s own wallet and cannot be paid before the previous settlement occurs, or after the time in which the margin is checked. Once the margin is checked to ensure it complies with the rules of the contract, the contract is valued and it can proceed to settlement, before a new cycle begins.
If the margin is not paid during the admissible window, or it is insufficient to make the payment, the contract is automatically terminated. To discourage counterparties from forcing a premature termination, which may pose issues in the case of American options and swaptions, a prefunded termination premium may also be introduced.
This paper shows how the digitisation of contracts may not only make the system more efficient, reconciliations less frequent and settlements quicker, but that it can also improve the risk profile of financial products
Massimo Morini, Banca IMI
The prefunding mechanism and termination clauses – together with the optional termination premium – de facto remove the counterparty risk associated with the transaction.
Once a trade is live, it would resemble a product with daily settlements, with significantly lower margining costs than conventional contracts. “The prefunding is similar to an initial margin. But since we can increase the frequency of this process, the margin is much smaller,” Fries explains.
Kohl-Landgraf describes it as both a product innovation and a process innovation.
“You have a product innovation because it’s a new structured product. It has a slightly modified payoff and it also changes from the regulatory side. It doesn’t have counterparty risk but it has market risk and liquidity risk in a certain sense,” he says. “And you have a process innovation: it’s a clear settlement process where the smart contract takes over the entire settlement procedure. And the only thing the banks need to do is to provide sufficient funding.”
The contract design also addresses some of the challenges of introducing disruptive technologies to banks. “Building a new infrastructure requires inputs and approvals from many departments, so we put quite some effort into finding a common language that could be equally understood by people from quant analysis, trading, IT, legal and risk control,” says Kohl-Landgraf.
コンテンツを印刷またはコピーできるのは、有料の購読契約を結んでいるユーザー、または法人購読契約の一員であるユーザーのみです。
これらのオプションやその他の購読特典を利用するには、info@risk.net にお問い合わせいただくか、こちらの購読オプションをご覧ください: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
現在、このコンテンツを印刷することはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。
現在、このコンテンツをコピーすることはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。
Copyright インフォプロ・デジタル・リミテッド.無断複写・転載を禁じます。
当社の利用規約、https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/(ポイント2.4)に記載されているように、印刷は1部のみです。
追加の権利を購入したい場合は、info@risk.netまで電子メールでご連絡ください。
Copyright インフォプロ・デジタル・リミテッド.無断複写・転載を禁じます。
このコンテンツは、当社の記事ツールを使用して共有することができます。当社の利用規約、https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/(第2.4項)に概説されているように、認定ユーザーは、個人的な使用のために資料のコピーを1部のみ作成することができます。また、2.5項の制限にも従わなければなりません。
追加権利の購入をご希望の場合は、info@risk.netまで電子メールでご連絡ください。
詳細はこちら 我々の見解
SpaceXがCMEの個別銘柄先物に待望の追い風をもたらした
S&P 500先物契約へのIPO関連の追加契約として、新たな契約が急増する可能性があります
Bank vs non-bank: FX’s two-tier reality
CME and LSEG data show banks provide sticky and broad liquidity, while non-banks cling tightly to the price
規制当局はエンフォースメントを甘くしているのか?(そして、私たちはそれを気にするべきなのか?)
米国の規制当局は、技術的な規則違反に対する罰則を緩和しており、小さくとも重要なリスクが見過ごされてしまうのではないかという懸念が高まっています
FX HedgePoolを超えて:オール・トゥ・オール(All-to-All)の今後はどうなる?
この取引モデルの支持者たちは、その将来性を明るく見ていますが、普及に向けた障壁は依然として残っています。
バーゼル協定のCVA見直し:米国では説得力があるものの、欧州ではそれほどではない
信用リスクモデルの使用禁止は、米国の銀行がより高度なCVA手法を採用するきっかけとなる可能性があります
オルタナティブ・データは予測市場に賭けているのか?
新たなデータの豊富な情報源を提供する一方で、法的な不確実性は依然として残っています
「SaaSpocalypse」は、プライベート市場にリスクモデルが必要であることを示している
投資家たちは、プライベート・クレジットにおける損失がどれほど深刻なものになるか、ほとんど見当がつかない
プライベート・クレジットの開示は、答えよりも疑問を残す結果となっている
指標の不統一や手当たり次第の報告が、米国の金融機関間の比較を妨げています