加速结算的行业准备

INDUSTRY PREPAREDNESS FOR ACCELERATED SETTLEMENT ANTHONYGANDYDANIELBROBYGARYWRIGHTTONYFREEMANMARKDURKIN PUBLICATIONDATE:30MAY2023 The viewsand opinions expressed in this paper are those ofthe authors. SWIFT and theSWIFT Institute have not made any editorial review of this paper, therefore the views andopinions do not necessarily reflect those of either SWIFT or the SWIFT Institute. Industry preparedness for accelerated settlement Anthony Gandya, Daniel Brobyb, Gary Wrightc, Tony Freemand, Mark Durkine aVisiting Professor, London Institute of Banking and Finance,bProfessor, Ulster University Business School,cDirector, ISITC Europe CIC ,dDirector, ISITC Europe CIC ,eProfessor, Ulster University Business School, Abstract This paper discusses the progress made towards T+1 and instantaneous settlement in financial markets, and industry preparednessfor such a change.We cover the various equity settlement technologies and analyse how collateral, stock lending and marginrequirements can impact the settlement processes. The debate on shortening the equity settlement cycle is discussed, along withpotential policy recommendations based on industry preparedness. The paper draws on 44 unstructured interviews and two focusgroup workshops with key stakeholders in the financial industry.This sample represents firms with total assets in the tens oftrillions. The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the issues surrounding accelerated settlement and offers insights forindustry practitioners. It was clear from our research that there is a perceived trade-offbetween the benefits of improving marketefficiency and infrastructure and the increased risk of settlement failure. As our interviews were focused on those with settlementand operations functions, the tone of the responses was biased towards the latter. The findings of this study will help stakeholdersidentify gaps in their current settlement processes and develop strategies to meet the demands of accelerated settlement. Keywords:, Settlement cycle, T+1, Swift Contents 7Challenges to industry preparedness7.1Margin and collateral. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87.2Prefunding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87.3Reducing the paper trail . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 1Introduction 8Methodology9 3Settlement protocols3.1Settlementworkedexample........... 4 9Results and discussion119.1Information and Technology. . . . . . . . . .11 43.1.1In a T+2 trade:. . . . . . . . . . . . .43.1.2In an atomic trade:. . . . . . . . . . .5 9.2North American timetable. . . . . . . . . . .129.3Timezones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .139.4Foreign exchange, pre-funding and operationalcosts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149.5Risk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 4Settlement processes,technologies and ways toachieve operational efficiencies 4.1Delivery versus Payment (DVP). . . . . . . .54.2Continuous Linked Settlement (CLS). . . . .54.3Central Counter-party Clearing (CCP). . . . .54.4Automated Clearing House (ACH) . . . . . . .54.5Straight Through Processing (STP) . . . . . . .54.6Distributed ledgers (DL). . . . . . . . . . . .6 10 Conclusion16 1. Introduction This paper investigates industry preparedness for shorter eq-uity settlement cycles. Since 2018 the US’s Depository Trust &Clearing Corporation (DTCC) has been exploring the benefitsof accelerating the US and Canadian equity settlements system(Abel (2022)). In 2021 the DTCC published a white paper call-ing for the US securities industry to come together and exploreshortening the North American equity settlement process fromthe current two-day to a one-day cycle DTCC (2023).The tempo of change towards accelerated settlement in the 5Factors affecting industry preparedness 6Settlement failures 6.0.1Delays in trade confirmation: . . . . . .66.0.2Errors in trade matching. . . . . . . .66.0.3Custodial errors . . . . . . . . . . . . .66.0.4Operational errors. . . . . . . . . . .66.0.5Insufficient funds/securities. . . . . .76.1Mitigations...................7 US has increased. In February 2023, the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) published its rules for one-day settlement tobe the standard settlement cycle for equities by May 2024 SEC(2023). This followed a series of short squeezes and market dis-ruption events. These were the results of collusion by amateurtraders to disrupt short sellers (eg Gamestop and Robinhood).Institutional market participants blamed slow settlement cyclesfor the difficulties they experienced.1 The debate on the move to accelerated settlement is impor-tant because settlement failure has direct consequences for theparties directly involved. Indeed, systemic failure could lead togridlock. That would impact liquidity and smooth functioningof financial markets.When initially arguing the case for moving US equity mar- kets from T+2 to T+1, the DTCC argued that the reduction inthe volatility element of central counter-party clearing marginrequirements would