Search
00
GBAF Logo
trophy
Top StoriesInterviewsBusinessFinanceBankingTechnologyInvestingTradingVideosAwardsMagazinesHeadlinesTrends

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the latest news and updates from our team.

Global Banking & Finance Review®

Global Banking & Finance Review® - Subscribe to our newsletter

Company

    GBAF Logo
    • About Us
    • Advertising and Sponsorship
    • Profile & Readership
    • Contact Us
    • Latest News
    • Privacy & Cookies Policies
    • Terms of Use
    • Advertising Terms
    • Issue 81
    • Issue 80
    • Issue 79
    • Issue 78
    • Issue 77
    • Issue 76
    • Issue 75
    • Issue 74
    • Issue 73
    • Issue 72
    • Issue 71
    • Issue 70
    • View All
    • About the Awards
    • Awards Timetable
    • Awards Winners
    • Submit Nominations
    • Testimonials
    • Media Room
    • FAQ
    • Asset Management Awards
    • Brand of the Year Awards
    • Business Awards
    • Cash Management Banking Awards
    • Banking Technology Awards
    • CEO Awards
    • Customer Service Awards
    • CSR Awards
    • Deal of the Year Awards
    • Corporate Governance Awards
    • Corporate Banking Awards
    • Digital Transformation Awards
    • Fintech Awards
    • Education & Training Awards
    • ESG & Sustainability Awards
    • ESG Awards
    • Forex Banking Awards
    • Innovation Awards
    • Insurance & Takaful Awards
    • Investment Banking Awards
    • Investor Relations Awards
    • Leadership Awards
    • Islamic Banking Awards
    • Real Estate Awards
    • Project Finance Awards
    • Process & Product Awards
    • Telecommunication Awards
    • HR & Recruitment Awards
    • Trade Finance Awards
    • The Next 100 Global Awards
    • Wealth Management Awards
    • Travel Awards
    • Years of Excellence Awards
    • Publishing Principles
    • Ownership & Funding
    • Corrections Policy
    • Editorial Code of Ethics
    • Diversity & Inclusion Policy
    • Fact Checking Policy
    Original content: Global Banking and Finance Review - https://www.globalbankingandfinance.com

    A global financial intelligence and recognition platform delivering authoritative insights, data-driven analysis, and institutional benchmarking across Banking, Capital Markets, Investment, Technology, and Financial Infrastructure.

    Copyright © 2010-2026 - All Rights Reserved. | Sitemap | Tags

    Editorial & Advertiser disclosure

    Global Banking & Finance Review® is an online platform offering news, analysis, and opinion on the latest trends, developments, and innovations in the banking and finance industry worldwide. The platform covers a diverse range of topics, including banking, insurance, investment, wealth management, fintech, and regulatory issues. The website publishes news, press releases, opinion and advertorials on various financial organizations, products and services which are commissioned from various Companies, Organizations, PR agencies, Bloggers etc. These commissioned articles are commercial in nature. This is not to be considered as financial advice and should be considered only for information purposes. It does not reflect the views or opinion of our website and is not to be considered an endorsement or a recommendation. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any information provided with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek Professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. We link to various third-party websites, affiliate sales networks, and to our advertising partners websites. When you view or click on certain links available on our articles, our partners may compensate us for displaying the content to you or make a purchase or fill a form. This will not incur any additional charges to you. To make things simpler for you to identity or distinguish advertised or sponsored articles or links, you may consider all articles or links hosted on our site as a commercial article placement. We will not be responsible for any loss you may suffer as a result of any omission or inaccuracy on the website.

    1. Home
    2. >Banking
    3. >BofE rate rise: the unintended trading cost consequences for banks
    Banking

    BofE Rate Rise: The Unintended Trading Cost Consequences for Banks

    Published by Gbaf News

    Posted on August 16, 2018

    8 min read

    Last updated: January 21, 2026

    Add as preferred source on Google
    Image depicting investors assessing the impact of drought on companies and exploring water management solutions. This relates to the article's discussion on the financial implications of water scarcity.
    Investors analyzing water scarcity impacts on companies - Global Banking & Finance Review
    Why waste money on news and opinion when you can access them for free?

    Take advantage of our newsletter subscription and stay informed on the go!

    Subscribe

    Tags:Capital Marketsequity and commodity derivativesFail funding of tradesMortgage repayments

    By Kerril Burke, CEO of Meritsoft

    Anyone long for a return to more benign economic times? A time when a rise in the base rate simply led to immediate benefits for savers.

    Well, get prepared for a continued long wait, as last week’s decision from the Bank of England’s (BofE) signals anything but a move to more conventional times.

    In fact this rise, albeit small, has much wider knock-on effects than simply “what does this mean for my mortgage repayments”? Similarly, it obviously increases the costs for anyone trading the capital markets in terms of funding. Even with interest rates at historically low levels, some of the biggest players have been losing double digit millions in unrecovered failed funding costs. And with more hikes down the road, there are further implications of the BofE rate increase for the cost of trading.

    Kerril Burke

    Kerril Burke

    As of last Thursday, the cost of the fail funding of trades in Sterling shot up 50%. Therefore, any trader looking to borrow say one million to finance a trade, now faces an extra 0.25% per annum in funding costs. One of the main strategies traders use to minimise funding is by buying and selling for the same contractual settlement date. This means paying funds from the proceeds received from a transaction. Take the example of a trader selling Sainsbury’s stock in order to fund a purchase of Tesco shares, both for the same agreed settlement date. The trader expects the cash from Sainsbury’s trade in order to settle the Tesco transaction. There is just one small issue – he hasn’t received the money for his stake in Sainsbury’s. In this, let’s face it not untypical scenario, the only way to pay for the Tesco shares is to borrow the money. The trader in question, now has to take on an additional funding cost to borrow the funds to settle the Tesco trade. If the reason for the fail in the Sainsbury shares was due to the counterparty, it does not seem fair that they are forced to pay this additional cost does it?

    But hey, perhaps it doesn’t cost much? The cost will obviously vary based on the amount of cash open and the length it is outstanding but it could run into USD thousands per trade! And the major trading firms can have thousands of securities, FX, equity and commodity derivatives fails everyday. This may have been hidden because rates have been and are largely still at record lows. But the trend and market sentiment is now unmistakably upwards. However, this is only part of the problem.

    There are costs and capital for market participants in the wide range of receivables on their balance sheet. These balances, at least the ones in Sterling, are now half a percent more expensive to fund. So the cost of failing to settle these transactions are now far more than they would have been before the hike. A bank is now at a distinct disadvantage, particularly if they do not have a way to identify, optimise and recover where they are incurring funding and capital costs through no fault of their own. Essentially, by having receivable items open while waiting for money to come in, it will be borrowing cash to cover itself. If a trade fails to settle for say five days, then that is a whole week of extra funding costs that a bank needs to cough up. And not being able to track additional funding costs due to the late settlements is not the only issue. Many banks are still not even identifying the direct cost impact of a trade actually failing. If a bank can’t work out the cost implications of not receiving funds when a trade fails, then how on earth can they identify whether or not they can claim money back from their counterparties?

    Trying to work out the many effects of the BofE’s latest monetary policy decision is difficult, but like those with a variable mortgage, trading desks are impacted. Late settlement means higher funding and higher rates means the additional funding costs more. Preparing now to handle the trading cost impact of this small rise and the upwards trend is exactly what’s needed to ensure banks are ahead of the curve whenever the BofE or other countries decide to hike rates again in the future.

    By Kerril Burke, CEO of Meritsoft

    Anyone long for a return to more benign economic times? A time when a rise in the base rate simply led to immediate benefits for savers.

    Well, get prepared for a continued long wait, as last week’s decision from the Bank of England’s (BofE) signals anything but a move to more conventional times.

    In fact this rise, albeit small, has much wider knock-on effects than simply “what does this mean for my mortgage repayments”? Similarly, it obviously increases the costs for anyone trading the capital markets in terms of funding. Even with interest rates at historically low levels, some of the biggest players have been losing double digit millions in unrecovered failed funding costs. And with more hikes down the road, there are further implications of the BofE rate increase for the cost of trading.

    Kerril Burke

    Kerril Burke

    As of last Thursday, the cost of the fail funding of trades in Sterling shot up 50%. Therefore, any trader looking to borrow say one million to finance a trade, now faces an extra 0.25% per annum in funding costs. One of the main strategies traders use to minimise funding is by buying and selling for the same contractual settlement date. This means paying funds from the proceeds received from a transaction. Take the example of a trader selling Sainsbury’s stock in order to fund a purchase of Tesco shares, both for the same agreed settlement date. The trader expects the cash from Sainsbury’s trade in order to settle the Tesco transaction. There is just one small issue – he hasn’t received the money for his stake in Sainsbury’s. In this, let’s face it not untypical scenario, the only way to pay for the Tesco shares is to borrow the money. The trader in question, now has to take on an additional funding cost to borrow the funds to settle the Tesco trade. If the reason for the fail in the Sainsbury shares was due to the counterparty, it does not seem fair that they are forced to pay this additional cost does it?

    But hey, perhaps it doesn’t cost much? The cost will obviously vary based on the amount of cash open and the length it is outstanding but it could run into USD thousands per trade! And the major trading firms can have thousands of securities, FX, equity and commodity derivatives fails everyday. This may have been hidden because rates have been and are largely still at record lows. But the trend and market sentiment is now unmistakably upwards. However, this is only part of the problem.

    There are costs and capital for market participants in the wide range of receivables on their balance sheet. These balances, at least the ones in Sterling, are now half a percent more expensive to fund. So the cost of failing to settle these transactions are now far more than they would have been before the hike. A bank is now at a distinct disadvantage, particularly if they do not have a way to identify, optimise and recover where they are incurring funding and capital costs through no fault of their own. Essentially, by having receivable items open while waiting for money to come in, it will be borrowing cash to cover itself. If a trade fails to settle for say five days, then that is a whole week of extra funding costs that a bank needs to cough up. And not being able to track additional funding costs due to the late settlements is not the only issue. Many banks are still not even identifying the direct cost impact of a trade actually failing. If a bank can’t work out the cost implications of not receiving funds when a trade fails, then how on earth can they identify whether or not they can claim money back from their counterparties?

    Trying to work out the many effects of the BofE’s latest monetary policy decision is difficult, but like those with a variable mortgage, trading desks are impacted. Late settlement means higher funding and higher rates means the additional funding costs more. Preparing now to handle the trading cost impact of this small rise and the upwards trend is exactly what’s needed to ensure banks are ahead of the curve whenever the BofE or other countries decide to hike rates again in the future.

    More from Banking

    Explore more articles in the Banking category

    Image for Nominate Today for the Leadership Awards 2026
    Nominate Today for the Leadership Awards 2026
    Image for Submit Your Entries for Insurance & Takaful Awards 2026
    Submit Your Entries for Insurance & Takaful Awards 2026
    Image for Calling for Entries: ESG & Sustainability Awards 2026
    Calling for Entries: ESG & Sustainability Awards 2026
    Image for Call for Entries: Deal of the Year Awards 2026
    Call for Entries: Deal of the Year Awards 2026
    Image for Submit Your Entry Today for Customer Service Awards 2026
    Submit Your Entry Today for Customer Service Awards 2026
    Image for Submit Your Entry Today for CSR Awards 2026
    Submit Your Entry Today for CSR Awards 2026
    Image for Submit Your Entry Today for Retail Banking Awards 2026
    Submit Your Entry Today for Retail Banking Awards 2026
    Image for Nominations Open for Islamic Banking Awards 2026
    Nominations Open for Islamic Banking Awards 2026
    Image for Submit Your Entry Today for Fund & Asset Management Awards 2026
    Submit Your Entry Today for Fund & Asset Management Awards 2026
    Image for Entries Open for Forex Banking Awards 2026
    Entries Open for Forex Banking Awards 2026
    Image for Call for Entries for Brand of the Year Awards 2026
    Call for Entries for Brand of the Year Awards 2026
    Image for Nominations Open for Corporate Banking Awards 2026
    Nominations Open for Corporate Banking Awards 2026
    View All Banking Posts
    Previous Banking PostPotential Threats of Open Banking
    Next Banking PostIndustrial Bank Co., Ltd Creates New Hong Kong Private Banking Business With Avaloq Banking Suite