We commend the work that IOSCO has undertaken to date on this topic including the survey work and the summary findings in the form of the report currently under review. It is fair to say that the conclusions of the report and areas for further work gave rise to detailed discussions within our industry, yielding ultimately firm views on the priority areas that we support and see value in, and areas we felt were not reflected in the study and thereby building risk into margining models in future crisis scenari
Investment managers, acting on behalf of their retail and institutional clients, are among the largest investors in financial markets. They represent a key component of the market’s “buy-side” segment.
In representing the interests of its members on wholesale capital market issues, EFAMA advocates for fair, deep, liquid, and transparent capital markets, supported by properly regulated and supervised market infrastructure.
For asset managers the main issue continues to be the reclassification of ETDs as OTCs as a result of the non-equivalence of UK regulated markets. While we understand that a review is legally mandated at this point in time, we do not see value in recalibrating the various thresholds or making changes to the calculation methodologies unless these are in the two areas we define below. Our main concern revolves around the fact that changes would carry significant compliance costs while making little impact on the population of counterparties and notional captured by the thresholds.
This is a timely and necessary review to which we hope to contribute in a constructive manner. As already recognised in the consultation paper and in the MiFID Quick Fix proposal, RTS 27 and RTS 28 currently fall short of the objective of providing valuable and comparable datasets for investment managers and the investing public. We appreciate the present effort to revise reporting requirements to produce more meaningful reports.
On 11 March 2021, EFAMA and 14 trade associations representing a wide range of stakeholders in the European and global financial markets wrote to the European Commission and ESMA raising concerns about the implementation of the mandatory buy-in requirement under the EU’s CSDR Settlement Discipline Regime.
EFAMA has reviewed ESMA’s statement “Supervisory work on potential index tracking”, which sets out research to determine whether any indication of closet indexing could be found at EU level. To contribute to the debate on this matter, EFAMA has prepared a paper, which highlights the limits of identifying closet index funds through a statistical analysis, drawing on recently published research papers.