Editorial & Advertiser Disclosure Global Banking And Finance Review is an independent publisher which offers News, information, Analysis, Opinion, Press Releases, Reviews, Research reports covering various economies, industries, products, services and companies. The content available on globalbankingandfinance.com is sourced by a mixture of different methods which is not limited to content produced and supplied by various staff writers, journalists, freelancers, individuals, organizations, companies, PR agencies Sponsored Posts etc. The information available on this website is purely for educational and informational purposes only. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any of the information provided at globalbankingandfinance.com with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. Globalbankingandfinance.com also links to various third party websites and we cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of the information provided by third party websites. Links from various articles on our site to third party websites are a mixture of non-sponsored links and sponsored links. Only a very small fraction of the links which point to external websites are affiliate links. Some of the links which you may click on our website may link to various products and services from our partners who may compensate us if you buy a service or product or fill a form or install an app. This will not incur additional cost to you. A very few articles on our website are sponsored posts or paid advertorials. These are marked as sponsored posts at the bottom of each post. For avoidance of any doubts and to make it easier for you to differentiate sponsored or non-sponsored articles or links, you may consider all articles on our site or all links to external websites as sponsored . Please note that some of the services or products which we talk about carry a high level of risk and may not be suitable for everyone. These may be complex services or products and we request the readers to consider this purely from an educational standpoint. The information provided on this website is general in nature. Global Banking & Finance Review expressly disclaims any liability without any limitation which may arise directly or indirectly from the use of such information.


By Lisa Iagatta, Director Account Management, Investment Services, Fiserv

Lisa Iagatta
Lisa Iagatta

Over three years have now passed since the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was signed into law, yet many of the act’s requirements are yet to be finalised. A key part of the regulation deals with trading and processing over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives. By changing the way in which OTC derivatives are to be traded, the Dodd-Frank reform aims to address weaknesses in the financial system. The introduction of central clearing counterparties (CCPs) to process and clear OTC trades seeks to address these weaknesses by mitigating counterparty credit and operational risks associated with OTC derivatives.

However, despite the continued lack of clarity the impending deadlines are prompting action. As a result, financial institutions are working with technology providers to reengineer their trading workflows within the limited guidelines received to date.

Based on the existing information available on the Dodd-Frank requirements, there are four main tasks financial institutions should be implementing in order to ensure compliance with the regulation.

  • Part of the regulation requires trades to be transmitted electronically, meaning that existing manual practices are no longer an option. Therefore institutions must now put in place electronic data file feeds for trades
  • The regulation requires enhanced trading communications from order management systems (OMS) to the CCPs, although there is still ambiguity around the required standard message types
  • Because there are different requirements for settling the various asset types, the next phase is to outline the steps for the routing, execution and settlement based on each security type, then capture that information through to client and regulatory reporting
  • Institutions must also ensure faster settlement of transactions than previously, due to the new 15-minute deadline from time of trade execution to send data to the appropriate CCPs

As Dodd-Frank becomes the financial law of the land, institutions will have to take additional steps to remain compliant. To ensure compliance, institutions must also provide comprehensive information regarding trade repositories and implement new risk management standards, including operational processes and margining for all bilateral OTC derivatives (for example, trades not cleared by a CCP). It is now a requirement of Dodd-Frank to utilise a message and application-agnostic trade flow solution for all asset types. This is aimed at removing the associated risks of processing OTC securities manually, especially when trading at high volumes.

The complexity and cost of complying with the regulation has led some market participants to turn to the futures market as an alternative to cleared swaps, due to its comparative simplicity and cost effectiveness. Many believe that there will be a continued trend away from OTC instruments and increased exposure to futurised swaps. However, time will tell if this is the case. As a result it could be that some hedge funds could begin executing different transactions and trading alternative products.

Further challenges will arise as a result of the regulations, demanding comprehensive derivative- contract reporting with the final details still forthcoming. The requirement for electronic trade transmissions will also mean that there will need to be increased use of electronic blotters for OTC trades, meaning additional costs for firms.

For global organisations, compliance with the regulation is complicated even further by the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR). Global organisations struggling to navigate the requirements of Dodd-Frank will also be impacted by parts of EMIR. While the regulators have spent time trying to align the two regulations as much as possible, there are both key overlaps and differences between EMIR and Dodd-Frank, and separate effort will be needed to meet EMIR’s additional requirements.

As firms and financial institutions work to comply with the requirements of Dodd-Frank, despite the regulation’s unclear implementation status, a new set of compliance activities have already emerged. Firms should invest in an application-agnostic technology solution to improve trade processing and remove the risks that accompany manual processing of esoteric securities. Financial institutions are currently developing new workflows and trade processes within the limited guidelines available, but many fear that these efforts may need to be adapted at a later date once the details have been finalised in order to ensure compliance.