Template:Repo - FWMD: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{fwmdtt|nickname=Repo|title=[[Global Master Repurchase Agreement]]|tagline=|documentation=Standard 2000 {{t|GMRA}}. Vague where it needs to be and not heavily negotiated.  (5)|booklets=Nope. (1)|customisability=Well, you can have fun doing a [[stock loan]] under a [[repo]] master and vice versa if you must but otherwise, no, very standard. (3)|asset classes=Bonds, cash. Equities at a stretch. (3)|amendability=Bilateral, so yes, in theory — but would you, unless MiFID changed and you had to? (4)|transferability=Niente. Bilateral contract. You could Novate, but really why would you? (2)|tenor=Short - typically no more than a month. But at least it ''has'' a tenor. So better than a [[stock loan]].(3)|leverage=Fully collateralised, so nope. (1)|collateral= Yes. (6)|longevity=Repos have been around for ages and they'll be around for ages. (10)|frightometer=Sorry: not going to get hearts racing. (1)}}
{{fwmdtt|nickname=Repo|imagetype=jpg|title=[[Global Master Repurchase Agreement]]|tagline=|documentation=Standard 2000 {{t|GMRA}}. Vague where it needs to be and not heavily negotiated.  (5)|booklets=Nope. (1)|customisability=Well, you can have fun doing a [[stock loan]] under a [[repo]] master and vice versa if you must but otherwise, no, very standard. (3)|asset classes=Bonds, cash. Equities at a stretch. (3)|amendability=Bilateral, so yes, in theory — but would you, unless MiFID changed and you had to? (4)|transferability=Niente. Bilateral contract. You could Novate, but really why would you? (2)|tenor=Short - typically no more than a month. But at least it ''has'' a tenor. So better than a [[stock loan]].(3)|leverage=Fully collateralised, so nope. (1)|collateral= Yes. (6)|longevity=Repos have been around for ages and they'll be around for ages. (10)|frightometer=Sorry: not going to get hearts racing. (1)}}

Revision as of 18:06, 29 October 2019

Top Trumps®
Financial Weapons of Mass Destruction®


[[File:{{{image}}}|frameless|2000px|center]]


Repo


“'


Docs Standard 2000 GMRA. Vague where it needs to be and not heavily negotiated. (5) {{{docscore}}}
Amendability Bilateral, so yes, in theory — but would you, unless MiFID changed and you had to? (4) {{{amendscore}}}
Collateral Yes. (6) {{{collateralscore}}}
Transferability Niente. Bilateral contract. You could Novate, but really why would you? (2) {{{transferscore}}}
Leverage Fully collateralised, so nope. (1) {{{leveragescore}}}
Fright-o-meter Sorry: not going to get hearts racing. (1) {{{frightscore}}}