![Risk.net](https://www.risk.net/sites/default/files/styles/print_logo/public/2018-09/print-logo.png?itok=1TpHrpuP)
Dealers 'getting very creative' ahead of FRTB implementation
FRTB will force banks to rethink the structure of their businesses
In order to use their own internal models under the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision's Fundamental review of the trading book (FRTB), major dealers are going to have to work hard to interpret the rules and up their game when it comes to modelling.
But in addition to this, they are also expected to make some more fundamental changes.
Because of differences in the way trading desks and products are treated under the FRTB, banks say they will need to rethink the structure of their businesses, including their trading desks and hedging strategies.
According to the FRTB text, "a trading desk is a group of traders or trading accounts that implements a well-defined business strategy operating within a clear risk management structure". At the largest banks, the number of trading desks is expected to be in the high double digits, but firms have some flexibility in terms of how these desks are delineated.
In some cases, banks are expected to start with the trading desks they use to comply with the Volcker rule, part of the US Dodd-Frank Act that limits proprietary trading. Firms may then pull out products for which they are unlikely to obtain modelling approval.
"It is a very personal and firm-specific choice," explains a source at a major UK bank. "We have heard banks that are more interested in going in that direction, because you already have [Volcker desks] as a benchmark – so it's attractive for some but it doesn't necessarily make sense for others."
A key factor many banks are thinking about is how regulators in different jurisdictions might implement the FRTB's more rigorous model approval process. With hedging desks situated in different locations across the globe, banks are eager to get some idea of how local regulators will approach trickier issues, such as non-modellable risk factors, and the irksome profit-and-loss attribution test.
Differences between jurisdictions would be a cause for concern, says one source at a major US bank. It would be problematic if, for instance, a trading desk based in the UK were hedging exposures in the US and one of the two countries' regulators denied model approval. "What if we have similar infrastructure and governance around our desk? What if one is approved and one is not? Then we have broken hedges, according to the rules," says the source.
This cuts both ways, however. There is already speculation that dealers may draw up contingency plans to hastily move a trading desk to a different, more favourable jurisdiction in the event that it loses model approval. One London-based consultant raises the possibility that banks could start relocating trading desks based on the capital impact from regulators' interpretations of the FRTB. "People are getting very creative," he says. "A lot of interesting things are happening."
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 print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Risk management
Op risk data: Two Sigma pays the price for model mess
Also: KuCoin’s AML fail, Angola bribes bite Trafigura, and Trump’s green scepticism. Data by ORX News
Cool heads must guide financial regulation of climate risk
Supervisors can’t simply rely on ‘magical thinking’ of market discipline, says Sergio Scandizzo
‘More questions than answers’ in race to build repo plumbing
Complexity could slow development of matching and credit-checking tools for US Treasury trades
How Citi moved GenAI from firm-wide ban to internal roll-out
Bank adopted three specific inward-facing use cases with a unified framework behind them
Margin standards are here – and clearing firms aren’t happy
Clearing members complain that latest transparency proposals would force them to act as middlemen by providing margin simulation tools for clients
Riding the storm: banking in the era of climate risk
Climate-related risk is playing an increasing role in banks’ future strategies, resilience and prosperity
Buffer stop: Eurex clearing members shunt default fund
Clearing house’s CRO says both members and clients opt to pay more margin instead
How a serverless risk engine transformed a digital bank
Migrating to the cloud permitted scalability, faster model updates and a better team structure