WFIC Day 1: Practicing Patience
On paper it all sounds great. Universities are starting to introduce data management courses. Regulators are reaching out to data professionals. C-level executives are increasingly aware of the benefits of data standardization. These are all developments I have heard about today at the World Financial Information Conference in San Francisco.
But at the same time, I’ve also heard delegates raising concerns, many related to the implementation of the legal entity identifier (LEI). When I participated in round tables on entity data management and legal entity identification, I was almost a tad disappointed. In the past year, there has been so much talk about the sudden pace of change in the legal entity identification space. Now I’m more skeptical about how fast this change will occur – not in relation to the creation of the actual standard, but in relation to how it will be implemented and used.
In the financial information community, market participants typically agree that firms can gain better insight into their business by improving entity data management, implementing a legal entity identifier. One of the round tables today looked at using an entity identifier as a primary key, with conference-goers discussing how this model could add value and help firms get a better overview of counterparty exposure.
The big question, however, is: will C-level executives listen to us? For a firm to change from a security-focused data model to an entity-focused model, they would need to have a long-term view. Many firms are often accused of focusing on the short term instead.
In addition, there is an array of regulatory requirements being pushed out at the same time, and some are seen as being even more important to C-level executives than legal entity identification. The other issue is the scope. There is widespread agreement that the LEI has to be global, but some are concerned there will be resistance in certain markets, and that this could impact firms' decisions on how to approach the implementation.
Despite these challenges, the hope is that firms will see the LEI implementation as being more than simply a mapping exercise. Can this also be an opportunity to make changes to the overall data model and strategy? The ideal situation would be if the LEI could be a catalyst for change, as firms will have to allocate budgets to the LEI project anyway. The conclusion at the round table was that since they need to spend, why not spend it the right way?
When firms do identify what spending the LEI budget the right way means to their business, the LEI project can potentially make a significant impact. This is perhaps where the real business benefits will be realized.
But it is not a given that firms will go that extra mile when the standard is first introduced. Like everything in the reference data industry, it will take time. I originally thought the LEI and entity data management would be the exception to the rule, but after today, I’m not so sure it is. I’m back to being patient.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
Preparing for the gathering storm
The Markets in Crypto-Assets (Mica) regulation came into force across the European Union on June 29 to enhance the transparency and integrity of the industry’s burgeoning crypto markets. Travis Schwab, CEO of Eventus, discusses his firm’s Mica strategy…
American Bankers Assoc. asks SEC: Do you know what you’re doing?
The industry group disagrees severely with regulators’ interpretation of the Financial Data Transparency Act, hinting at possible legal action in a recently published comment letter.
DORA will change the buy vs. build debate… maybe
Waters Wrap: With DORA’s deadline looming, trading firms are having to reassess their long-term tech strategies. Anthony wonders if that means more building and less buying.
The SEC needs a hand with artificial intelligence
The SEC wants to take a tough stance on AI, but it has a talent problem… or a marketing problem. Or both…
Off-channel messaging (and regulators) still a massive headache for banks
Waters Wrap: Anthony wonders why US regulators are waging a war using fines, while European regulators have chosen a less draconian path.
Banks fret over vendor contracts as Dora deadline looms
Thousands of vendor contracts will need repapering to comply with EU’s new digital resilience rules
Chevron’s absence leaves questions for elusive AI regulation in US
The US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron deference presents unique considerations for potential AI rules.
Aussie asset managers struggle to meet ‘bank-like’ collateral, margin obligations
New margin and collateral requirements imposed by UMR and its regulator, Apra, are forcing buy-side firms to find tools to help.