Money, Banking and Financial Markets

Commentary

Commentary

 
 
Posts tagged Reference rate
Making the Treasury Market Resilient

Ensuring financial stability requires resilient institutions. That is why regulators around the world have strengthened capital and liquidity requirements for the largest financial intermediaries since financial crisis of 2007-09.

Making financial markets resilient is equally important. Repeated and sustained bouts of illiquidity and dysfunctionality in a key market can threaten the well-being of even the healthiest institutions.

In a global financial system that runs on dollars, the most important financial market is the one for U.S. Treasury securities. Yet, despite its importance and general reliability, the Treasury market occasionally suffers from serious disruptions. The strains in the Treasury market during the first half of March 2020 became an important motivation for the Federal Reserve’s unprecedented anti-COVID policy actions beginning that month (see here, here and here).

In the remainder of this post, we describe the COVID-induced troubles in the Treasury market and highlight Duffie’s compelling proposal to consider requiring central clearing of U.S. Treasuries. We endorse Duffie’s call to study such a mandate, and view this is as an important element of a broader effort to modernize and reinforce the financial infrastructure….

Read More
Steve Cecchetti and Kim SchoenholtzTreasury, Treasuries, Liquidity, Market resilience, Federal Reserve, COVID-19, Monetary policy, Off- vs. on-the-run spread, Collateral, Reserve currency, Foreign exchange reserves, Foreign currency reserves, Liquidity risk, Maturity risk, Credit risk, Benchmark, Reference rate, Yield volatility, TRACE, Primary dealer, Automated trading systems, ATS
Alternative Reference Rates: Meeting the Challenges

Guest post by Richard Berner, Executive-in-Residence (Center for Global Economy and Business) and Adjunct Professor, NYU Stern School of Business

In response to the fragility of LIBOR and other interest-rate benchmarks, regulators globally are working with industry to identify sturdy alternatives. Despite significant progress, concerns persist that the transition to these new reference rates will be disruptive.

While these concerns are legitimate (see Eclipsing LIBOR), both U.S. and global authorities and market participants have begun to address them in ways that should go a long way to managing the risks. In this post, we review why LIBOR’s persistent fragility makes reform critical, and examine progress on some of the ongoing reforms....

Read More
Steve Cecchetti and Kim SchoenholtzLIBOR, SOFR, ARRC, ISDA, SIFMA, DTCC, IOSCO, Office of Financial Research, FRBNY, Reference rate, Benchmark, Bank funding risk, Secured overnight financing rate, MMMF, Prime institutional money fund, Floating net asset value, NAV, Derivatives, Swaps, IBOR, LIBOR+, TIBOR, EFFR
Eclipsing LIBOR

The manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) began more than a decade ago. Employees of leading global firms submitted false reports to the British Banking Association (BBA), first to influence the value of LIBOR-linked derivatives, and later (during the financial crisis) to conceal the deterioration of their employers’ creditworthiness. U.S. and European regulators reported many of the details in 2012 when they fined Barclays, the first of a dozen financial firms that collectively paid fines exceeding $9 billion (see here). In addition to settling claims of aggrieved clients, these firms face enduring reputational damage: in some cases, management was forced out; in others, individuals received jail terms for their wrongdoing.

You might think that in light of this costly scandal, and the resulting challenges in maintaining LIBOR, market participants and regulators would have quickly replaced LIBOR with a sustainable short-term interest rate benchmark that had little risk of manipulation. You’d be wrong: the current administrator (ICE Benchmark Administration), which replaced the BBA in 2014, estimates that this guide (now called ICE LIBOR) continues to serve as the reference interest rate for “an estimated $350 trillion of outstanding contracts in maturities ranging from overnight to more than 30 years [our emphasis].” In short, LIBOR is still the world’s leading benchmark for short-term interest rates.

Against this background, U.K. Financial Conduct Authority CEO Andrew Bailey, recently called for a transition away from LIBOR before 2022 (see here). In this post, we briefly explain LIBOR’s role, why it remains an undesirable and unsustainable interest rate benchmark, and why it will be so difficult to replace (even gradually over several years) without risking disruption.

Read More
Steve Cecchetti and Kim SchoenholtzLIBOR, LIBOR+, Euribor, Benchmark, Reference rate, Manipulation, Collateral, Secured financing, Unsecured financing, Transaction costs, Liquidity, Market depth, Risk hedging, Cash market, Derivatives, Risk-free rate, Funding risk, FSOC, Secured overnight financing rate, SOFR, Alternative Reference Rate Committee, Financial Conduct Authority, FCA, Financial Stability Board, FSB, Market Participants Group, Commercial paper, Certificate of deposit, Office of Financial Research, British Banking Association, BBA, ICE, Coordination, Contract frustration, Legal risk