The Central Bank of Ireland wants to restrict collateral diversification relaxation, but the International Securities Lending Association disagrees

The Central Bank of Ireland claimed in July that there are strong grounds for limiting the collateral diversification relaxation set out in the revised version of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) guidelines on exchange-traded funds and other UCITS issues.

The central bank invited all stakeholders to provide comments on its consultation paper, with the responses to be assessed following the 17 October deadline. The International Securities Lending Association (ISLA) obliged, with chief executive Kevin McNulty writing a letter to the central bank on deadline day.

The collateral diversification relaxation, which was initially intended to apply to UCITS money market funds (MMFs), was extended to all UCITS funds in ESMA’s final report in March, following market support for the move. But the Central Bank of Ireland is worried that the extension could result in funds holding on to sovereign collateral of deteriorating credit quality in stressed market conditions.

ESMA’s guidelines require all collateral to be of “high quality” and no UCITS fund can have exposure of more than 20 percent of its collateral basket to any single issuer. UCITS MFFs are exempt from this, as long as they receive securities from at least six different issuers, and no single issuer accounts for more than 30 percent of the collateral received.

The Central Bank of Ireland, in its 28 July consultation paper, said high quality is not adequately defined to warrant the relaxation being extended to all UCITS funds.

“UCITS MMFs are subject to quite specific requirements with regard to credit quality, which means that even where collateral is not diversified, a UCITS MMF will still be required to hold collateral, which, if rated, will have been awarded one of the two highest available short-term credit ratings by the credit rating agency that has rated the instrument, or, if the instrument is not rated, it is of an equivalent quality as determined by the management company’s internal rating process.”

“The effect of the disapplication to all UCITS is that the only protection in place with regard to the kind of sovereign debt collateral a non-UCITS MMF can take is an undefined requirement that it be of ‘high quality’.”

“The vagueness of that requirement was acceptable under the original guidelines because it was counter-balanced by the precision of the 20 percent diversification requirement.”

The Central Bank of Ireland wants a rule introduced requiring a UCITS fund to only be able to accept high quality collateral. A determination of whether the collateral is sufficiently ‘high quality’ would be made before accepting it.

Any acceptance that would mean that more than 20 percent of the UCITS fund’s total collateral comes from the specific issuer would require a more detailed assessment of credit quality. In the event of deteriorating credit quality, the UCITS fund would have to put into place and execute an action plan to deal with its exposure to the collateral, and cease holding and receiving collateral that does not have one of the two highest available ratings.

The Central Bank of Ireland stated: “We recognise that this would mean that Irish rules on UCITS collateral would be substantially different from other member states. If we can achieve a satisfactory risk mitigation effect without creating that difference we prefer to do so.”

In response, ISLA’s McNulty wrote that the ESMA derogation allows a UCITS to be fully collateralised in transferable securities issued by a member state as long as diversification levels are maintained at an issue level.

“These requirements are amongst the strictest in the world for funds and institutions participating in EPM (efficient portfolio management) techniques. There are a number of additional safeguards, alongside diversification in the guidelines that apply to all collateral (including government bonds) and therefore we do not believe that further safeguards are not required.”

Existing market practices dictate that where accepted collateral deteriorates in credit quality to less than is acceptable to the UCITS, “this will be identified immediately and the collateral issue replaced with acceptable collateral”, according to ISLA.

“It is well established practice that collateral in securities lending and repo markets is reviewed by the parties on a daily basis.”

“We therefore believe that the concerns are better addressed through the requirement that the UCITS must ensure that collateral meets the criteria in the guidelines on an ongoing basis and that arbitrarily further restricting the collateral that can be accepted is not necessary.”

The suggested collateral management framework, which the central bank acknowledged would implement a different approach for Irish UCITS than other European UCITS, will be disadvantageous to nationally domiciled funds, according to ISLA.

“With investors focusing on the cost profile of funds, securities lending can provide a low risk revenue stream. In a competitive market, having different and potentially more restrictive collateral requirements that will need additional resources to manage means that Irish UCITS may become less attractive to borrow from and therefore generate less return.”

McNulty warned in the letter: “Whilst this would not be a deciding factor, this may be a consideration when a new UCITS is deciding on jurisdiction.”

A further concern for ISLA’s members is the Central Bank of Ireland’s reliance on credit rating agencies, which goes against the grain of Financial Stability Board (FSB) proposals.
McNulty quotes the FSB publication ‘Principles for Reducing Reliance on Credit Rating Agencies’, which states: “Standard setters and authorities should assess references to credit rating agency (CRA) ratings in standards, laws and regulations and, wherever possible, remove them or replace them by suitable alternative standards of creditworthiness.”

McNulty wrote on behalf of ISLA: “We believe there are already a number of safeguards in the guidelines that apply to all collateral including government bonds and therefore further safeguards are not required.”

“For example, the requirement to stress test collateral portfolios if more than 30 percent of the fund NAV (net asset value) is exceeded in collateral value ensures that collateral portfolios are appropriately analysed and risk levels remain appropriate. This process would capture the deterioration of credit quality.”

The Central Bank of Ireland is expected to publish other comments soon, but if any of the other commentators adopted ISLA’s position, it could well have a fight on its hands.

Country profiles
The latest country profiles from Securities Lending Times
Being an exciting emerging market is all well and good, but how long can that status really apply before interest wanes? India is doing its best not to find out
Hugh Leonard, director of repo sales at Australia and New Zealand Banking Group, explains how the Australian market has excelled in recent years
Asset Servicing Times

Visit our sister site
for all the latest asset servicing news and analysis
Securities lending is in a strong place in Australia. Dane Fannin, head of capital markets in the Asia Pacific at Northern Trust, explains the available opportunities
Federico Ortega Gilly of Mexico’s Nacional Financiera explains why his country’s securities lending market is ripe for foreign investment
Russia’s National Settlement Depository has had a busy year making its securities finance market more robust and attractive to outside investors. The CSD’s Alina Akchurina explains the innovations being implemented
South Africa’s securities lending industry is on the verge of embracing a modern T+3 settlement cycle that could boost the country’s market
Experts on Canada’s securities lending industry discuss the market’s qualities compared to others, finding it to be a strong source of HQLAs
A difficult end to 2015 has not deterred securities borrowers and lenders in Asia, where certain markets enjoyed significant growth and offered new opportunities
The latest features from Securities Lending Times
Drew Nicol and BNY Mellon’s James Slater discuss the results of a joint research study with PwC exploring buy-side opinions on central counterparties, incoming collateral rules and the rise of peer-to-peer lending
The economic environment, regulatory pressures and technological advances are creating entirely new opportunities for the industry, says Bimal Kadikar of Transcend Street Solutions
Join Our Newsletter

Sign up today and never
miss the latest news or an issue again

Subscribe now
Those that lead and innovate will strive to provide competitive advantage and agility. Helen Nicol of Lombard Risk explains how
J.P. Morgan expects to see a continuation of the increase in lendable assets with Taiwan clients and anticipates more interest in this product, says Frank Niu
Francois Maury of Natixis examines how the Japanese market has fared and what it means for borrowing and lending. Drew Nicol reports
Super funds are again looking to securities lending as a source of incremental revenue, says Natalie Floate of BNP Paribas
Asia has an ageing system of fragmented processes that have failed to keep up with the rapid growth of the markets and increasingly complex trading strategies, according to Laura Allen of Trading Apps
Businesses can strategically address their collateral and liquidity management operations and regulatory needs by adopting a more holistic integration approach, says Bimal Kadikar of Transcend Street Solutions
The latest interviews from Securities Lending Times