
Global asset managers struggling with Mifid preparations
Daily news headlines
An Ernst & Young poll of 381 global asset managers has revealed that less than a third (30%) are confident they will definitely meet the November 1 deadline for implementing the European Union’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Mifid).
Some 8% of those polled said they would not be able to comply by the deadline, and almost two-thirds (62%) are unsure that they will.
Asset managers must accelerate the pace of their Mifid preparations to ensure they are as compliant as possible with the directive – or if not, at least to ensure they keep pace with peers. Only 6% of the asset managers polled thought their organisation was ahead of peers in implementing the programme, less than a third (29%) thought they were in line, and 57% were not sure how they compared.
“This poll makes interesting reading,” says Ratan Engineer, global asset management leader at Ernst & Young. “Although some asset managers have already engaged with the real business issues that Mifid presents, such as relations with clients, distributors and brokers and the operational impact, many are just getting started.”
“Continuing regulatory uncertainty does not help, but it is essential for managers to maintain the pressure on their Mifid implementation plans. Ignorance will not be an acceptable excuse on November 1, but sensibly advanced plans and programmes should certainly help mitigate any regulatory wrath,” he adds.
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 info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Operational risk
Power play: how geopolitics is shaping op risk at G-Sibs
Op Risk Benchmarking: Geopolitics is a top five fear for G-Sibs, but most banks lack specialist risk staff and classical tools
Automating regulatory compliance and reporting
Flaws in the regulation of the banking sector have been addressed initially by Basel III, implemented last year. Financial institutions can comply with capital and liquidity requirements in a natively integrated yet modular environment by utilising…
No tick-the-box approach to compliance risks
Op Risk Benchmarking: G-Sibs share fear of regulatory run-ins, but lack common stance on modelling, KRIs and more
Bread-and-butter op risks at the top table
Op Risk Benchmarking: As G-Sibs are forced to do more, how can they avoid doing more wrong?
Op Risk Benchmarking: Inside the G-Sibs
New initiative scrutinises op risk measurement and management practices at the world’s largest banks
Sizing cyber: banks split on who owns and measures hack threats
Op Risk Benchmarking: G-Sibs split on risk modelling and management for IT disruption and infosec
Banks frequently breach appetite for top op risks
Op Risk Benchmarking: Five G-Sibs breached appetite in past year across four risk types, new research reveals
Investment banks: the future of risk control
This Risk.net survey report explores the current state of risk controls in investment banks, the challenges of effective engagement across the three lines of defence, and the opportunity to develop a more dynamic approach to first-line risk control