82,927
edits
Template:Derivatives as specified indebtedness: Difference between revisions
Template:Derivatives as specified indebtedness (view source)
Revision as of 15:40, 3 November 2020
, 3 November 2020no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Now it is true that you can provide the {{isdaprov|Specified Indebtedness}} represented by a [[master trading agreement]] can be calculated by reference to its net close-out amount, but this only really points up the imbalance between buy-side and sell-side. Sure, buy-side managers may have fifty or even a hundred {{isdama}}s but they will be split across dozens of different funds. [[Broker dealer|Broker-dealer]]s, on the other hand, will have ''hundreds of thousands of [[master agreement]]s, all facing the same legal entity''. Credit dudes: ''you are the wrong side of this risk, fellas''. | Now it is true that you can provide the {{isdaprov|Specified Indebtedness}} represented by a [[master trading agreement]] can be calculated by reference to its net close-out amount, but this only really points up the imbalance between buy-side and sell-side. Sure, buy-side managers may have fifty or even a hundred {{isdama}}s but they will be split across dozens of different funds. [[Broker dealer|Broker-dealer]]s, on the other hand, will have ''hundreds of thousands of [[master agreement]]s, all facing the same legal entity''. Credit dudes: ''you are the wrong side of this risk, fellas''. | ||
Now seeing as most trading agreements are fully collateralised, and so don’t represent material indebtedness on a netted basis, it may be that even with hundreds of thousands of the blighters, no-one’s {{isdaprov|Threshold}} | Now seeing as most trading agreements are fully collateralised, and so don’t represent material indebtedness on a netted basis, it may be that even with hundreds of thousands of the blighters, no-one’s {{isdaprov|Threshold Amount}} will ever be seriously threatened. But if no {{isdaprov|Threshold Amount}} is ever at risk from an {{isdama}}, then ''why are you including the {{isdama}} in {{isdaprov|Specified Indebtedness}} in the first place?'' | ||
O tempora. O [[paradox]]. <br> | O tempora. O [[paradox]]. <br> | ||