IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ4/7958970.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Better anti-procyclicality? From a critical assessment of anti-procyclicality tools to regulatory recommendations

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Siegl
  • Daniel Steinberg

Abstract

In the aftermath of the 2007–9 global financial crisis, the regulation of the financial industry was the focus of the regulators in many countries. Alongside the clearing mandates, the European Markets Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) seeks to mitigate procyclical behavior of the central counterparty margins in times of crisis or stress. The regulations are known as anti-procyclicality (APC) tools. Such tools are used by most central counterparties worldwide. We conduct a critical assessment of the existing APC tools from both a qualitative perspective and a quantitative perspective. We calibrate and compare initial margin models and derive APC results for a representative Deutscher Aktienindex (DAX) portfolio in Germany. This quantitative assessment is complemented by qualitative policy recommendations toward more effective APC tools that extend beyond initial-margin-based approaches (such as improved transparency, collateral eligibility, clear definitions of procyclicality) and the reconsideration of the loss distribution within the clearing system.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ4:7958970
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2024-02/jor_Siegl_web_final.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsk:journ4:7958970. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-risk .

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.