The black art of FVA: Banks spark double-counting fears

Dealers broadly agree that funding costs and benefits should be priced into uncollateralised trades, and some banks have started recognising this in their financial statements. But there is no standard practice, and there are fears of double-counting. By Matt Cameron

risk-0413-illo

Accountants are often dismissed as bean counters – fussy types that miss the big picture because of an obsession with arithmetic. It’s a stereotype that evaporates at the wilder frontiers of the discipline, where bank accounting departments are struggling to work out how, and whether, to recognise the funding valuation adjustment (FVA) trading desks argue is a key component of derivatives prices.

With no rules to guide them and no disclosures required, some banks are stitching together FVA

Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.

To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

Most read articles loading...

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

Sign in
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here