IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ7/7956394.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Payment coordination and liquidity efficiency in wholesale payments systems

Author

Listed:
  • Francisco Rivadeneyra
  • Nellie Zhang

Abstract

A new wholesale payments system launched in Canada in 2021. This real-time gross settlement system, called Lynx, has two types of settlement mechanisms, one allowing offsetting and the other not. This paper studies the decision problem of the Bank of Canada: which of the two settlement mechanisms it should use to send its payments. Using extensive simulation, we show that, mainly due to the benefits of liquidity pooling, Lynx would achieve its highest liquidity efficiency (even better than that of the current Large Value Transfer System (LVTS)) if all payments (urgent and nonurgent) from all participants were sent to the mechanism allowing offsetting. The minimum amount of liquidity required to settle all payments by critical intraday deadlines is approximately C$10 billion, around half the amount of collateral that LVTS participants allocated pre-Covid-19. Since time-critical payments sent to the offsetting mechanism could experience a delay, the high level of liquidity efficiency is accompanied by an increase in the number of participants’ operational interventions (to pledge more collateral or to alter payment priorities) to ensure that those time-critical payments are never delayed. When coordination does not occur, liquidity efficiency can be far lower than in the LVTS. The results highlight that the Bank of Canada helping with coordination is more important than the specific choice of mechanism.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ7:7956394
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2023-03/jfmi_rivardeneyra_online_early.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:journ7:7956394. 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-financial-market-infrastructures .

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.