Repo and Repo Markets

by
George Dorgan
My articles My siteAbout meMy videosMy books
Follow on:LinkedINTwitterSeeking Alpha
CFA SocietyEconomicBlogs

Traders and investors seek to manage risks as intelligently as possible. Over the years, a portfolio of investment vehicles and risk-management techniques has been created to detect and reduce risk exposures.

Secured financing, where collateral is used to mitigate risks, is one of those techniques. It is increasingly used by cash investors and treasurers to protect themselves against counterparty and other potential risks. And, it is now a critical contributor to the efficient functioning of global capital markets.

Repurchase agreements – or ‘repos’ as they are commonly known – are one of the most widely used securities financing transactions. They have become a key source of capital market liquidity. Previously viewed as a primarily back-office activity in the 1990s, repos are now integral components of the banking industry’s treasury, liquidity and assets/liabilities management disciplines. Moreover, repos are also an essential transaction used by central banks for the management of open market operations.

In a repo transaction, the cash giver will expect some form of collateral, securities for example, to be placed in its account by the cash taker as a form of protection in the event the cash taker is not able to return the borrowed cash before or at the end of the repo agreement. The characteristics of the collateral to be exchanged are defined and agreed up front. However, the responsibilities of valuing the collateral daily, of issuing collateral margin calls or returning excess collateral, making substitutions when securities used as collateral are needed to fulfil trading obligations, and more, can become daunting and distracting from more profitable business activities.

Rather than build their own collateral management capabilities, firms often find it operationally and economically efficient to outsource collateral management to neutral triparty agents, such as Euroclear Bank. Because triparty collateral managers are able to integrate transaction-specific collateral management requirements with the process of settling the underlying transactions, they are well placed to offer a compelling value proposition. They relieve repo counterparties of the operational burdens of making sure the right collateral is in the right place at the right time. And, triparty agents help to reduce the inherent operational risks that both counterparties assume in the collateral management process.

Triparty collateral management is also an evolving business, with recent developments such as the re-use (or rehypothecation) of collateral to optimise collateral usage. Furthermore, the growing trend towards anonymous trading in baskets of collateral is transforming repo into a truly secured money market instrument, delivering the best of both worlds: the security of a repo and the simplicity of a money market instrument.

As a result of the market’s greater focus on risk management, good quality collateral is becoming a scarce resource. Thus, collateral optimisation and collateral management efficiency is vital. This can only be achieved by centralising collateral and the management of collateral from a pool of assets spanning various types of securities, markets and transactions, such as repos, securities loans and OTC derivatives. The need to reduce the fragmentation of collateral pools across Europe is escalating as more and more firms are finding it too expensive and cumbersome to manage collateral on a cross-border basis.

The securities financing business is maturing and repos have been established as the flagship product. Hardly a firm active in domestic and cross-border investments is unaware of the benefits and usefulness of repos. Therefore, it is important to understand how repos work, the market for these transactions and the operational challenges to support them.

The aim of this book is to help those needing basic information on repos to gain familiarity with and knowledge about this growing market. It was created with the generosity of many professionals who volunteered their valuable time to share their knowledge with us. We particularly want to thank Richard Comotto, Visiting Fellow at the ICMA Centre at the University of Reading, who contributed greatly to this effort.

We believe the book will serve as a useful primer and/or reference tool for treasury and secured finance professionals as well as those managing risk, regulatory, legal and operational issues relating to repos.

We look forward to working with you.

The instrument

A repo is a loan secured against collateral. However, repo collateral is not pledged, like traditional collateral, but sold and then repurchased at maturity. Ownership gives the lender stronger control over the collateral, which makes repo the preferred means of lending for risk-averse cash investors. On the other hand, the lower risk on repo makes it a source of cheaper financing and greater leverage for borrowers. Consequently, repo has become the primary source of funding for leveraged traders such as proprietary desks and hedge funds. Repo can take the form of either repurchase agreements or buy/sell-backs, which do the same job, but have legal and operational differences. As well as being used to borrow cash, repo can also be used to borrow securities, in order to cover short positions. Repo used in this way is comparable to securities lending. For securities strongly in demand, the repo market will offer cheap cash in exchange. Such securities are said to be ‘special’. The interest given up by the buyer of a ‘special’ in the repo market is equivalent to the fee paid by the borrower of the same securities in the securities lending market.

What is Repo? Repo can be defined as an agreement in which one party sells securities or other assets to a counterparty, and simultaneously commits to repurchase the same or similar assets from the counterparty, at an agreed future date or on demand, at a repurchase price equal to the original sale price plus a return on the use of the sale proceeds during the term of the repo. Between the sale and the repurchase: The seller gets the use of the cash proceeds of the sale of the assets. The buyer gets legal title to the assets received in exchange for the cash it has paid. The buyer holds the assets in the first instance as collateral. If the seller defaults on the repurchase, the buyer can liquidate the assets to recover some or all of its cash. In addition, because the buyer owns the collateral assets, the buyer can re-use them during the term of the repo by selling the assets outright, repo-ing them or pledging them to a third party. The buyer must buy back the assets by the end of the repo, in order to be able to sell them back to the seller.	Figure 1: Repurchase agreement - Click to enlarge
Repo Terminology Repo’ is the generic term for two equivalent instruments: repurchase agreements (also known as ‘classic repos’) buy/sell-backs Repurchase agreements and buy/sell-backs share the same basic legal and operational mechanisms (i.e. a sale of assets and a commitment by the seller to repurchase those assets from the buyer at a later date). The principal differences between a repurchase agreement and a buy/sell-back stem from the fact that repurchase agreements are always documented (i.e. they are evidenced by a written contract), whereas traditional buy/sell-backs are not. Consequently, the two legs of a repurchase agreement are part of a single legal contract, whereas the two legs of a traditional, undocumented buy/sell-back are implicitly separate contracts. Many of the terms used in the market to describe repos are taken from standard legal agreements, such as the Global Master Repurchase Agreement (GMRA), which are commonly used to document transactions in the international repo market. The terms are illustrated in the diagram and defined in the table. Term Definition Seller Collateral-provider, cash-taker (borrower). Buyer Collateral-taker, cash-provider (lender). Purchase Sale of assets at the start of a repo. Repurchase Repurchase of assets at the end of a repo. Purchase date Value date: the date on which cash and assets are actually exchanged. Repurchase date Maturity date: the date on which cash and assets are returned to their original owners. Purchase price Cash value paid by the buyer of assets to the seller on the purchase date. Repurchase price Cash value paid by the seller of assets to the buyer on the repurchase date: equal to the purchase price plus a return on the use of the cash over the term of the repo. In buy/sell-backs, the repurchase price may be net of coupon or dividend payments made on the assets during the term of the repo (see page 29). Collateral Assets sold in a repo on the purchase date. Equivalent collateral Assets repurchased in a repo by the seller on the repurchase date. Repo rate Percentage per annum rate of return paid by the seller for the use of the cash over the term of a repurchase agreement and included in the repurchase price. Although the term ‘repo’ is applied to the whole transaction, it is market convention to specifically describe the seller’s side of the transaction as the ‘repo’ and the buyer’s side as the ‘reverse repo’. Dealers talk about sellers ‘repo-ing out’ collateral and buyers ‘reversing in’ collateral.	Figure 2: Repurchase Agreement - Click to enlarge
Comparing Repurchase Agreements and Buy/Sell-Backs There is much confusion about the differences between repurchase agreements and buy/sell-backs. Comparisons are complicated by the fact that buy/sell-backs can now be documented (so that there are three types of repo: repurchase agreements, undocumented buy/sell-backs, and documented buy/sell-backs). Undocumented buy/sell-backs, which are the traditional form of the instrument, have a number of legal and operational drawbacks in comparison with repurchase agreements and documented buy/sell-backs. These differences are explained on page 25 – ‘Managing repo’. Examples of Repurchase Agreements and Buy/Sell-Backs Repurchase agreement If the transaction is structured as a repurchase agreement, at a one-week repo rate of 0.885%, the cash flows would be: As there is no initial margin/haircut (see page 26 – ‘Initial margin’), the purchase price is simply the full cash market value of the bond: 5.625 x 178 10,000,000 + = 12,157,315.07 100 x 365 The repo’s interest payment is calculated as it would be for a deposit in the same currency (in the case of EUR, using a day count/annual basis convention of actual/360); 0.885 x 31 12,157,315.07  = 9,264.89 100 x 360 The Repurchase price is simply the purchase price plus the repo interest: 12,157,315.07 + 9,264.89 = 12,166,579.96	Examples of repurchase agreements and buy/sell-backs Consider the following repo transaction: Example Buy/Sell-Backs - Click to enlarge Example Repurchase Buy/Sell-Backs - Click to enlarge The Repurchase Price is Simply the Purchase Price Plus the Repo Interest - Click to enlarge Bloomberg Buy/Sell-Back Repo Analysis - Click to enlarge
Buy/sell-back If the transaction was structured as a buy/sell-back with equivalent terms to the previous repurchase agreement, the cash flows would be: There is no reference to repo interest, as there is none in a buy/sell-back. The return paid by the seller for use of the cash is the difference between the purchase price and repurchase price. The price of this buy/sell-back would traditionally have been quoted as a clean forward price, calculated by adjusting the repurchase price for the accrued interest on the collateral: Repurchase price – accrued interest at Repurchase date x 100 nominal value 5.625 x (178 + 31) 12,166,579.96 10,000,000 100 x 366                    x 100 = 118.44490915       10,000,000	Buy/Sell-Back Previous Repurchase Agreement - Click to enlarge Bloomberg Buy-Seel Back Rep Analysis - Click to enlarge
General Collateral Repo, Specials and Securities Lending General collateral repo General Collateral (GC) repo is defined as a collateralised transaction driven by the need to borrow or lend cash. This means that the buyer does not insist on the seller providing a particular securities issue as collateral, but will accept any of a range of similar quality issues. In other words, the buyer has a ‘general’ requirement for collateral and the seller has some choice about precisely which securities to deliver. The bulk of repo is GC. As a means of borrowing or lending, GC repo is an alternative to unsecured money market instruments such as deposits and Commercial Paper (CP). The GC repo rate is therefore highly correlated with other money market rates. GC repo rates are most often compared with interbank deposit rates such as LIBOR and Fed funds. Given that repos are secured with collateral, the GC repo rate is normally below interbank deposit rates. The repo rates of euro-denominated repo are typically compared to the EONIA swap rate. Figure 6 compares Eurepo, EURIBOR and the EONIA swap rate, both for a term of one month[1]. [1] ) The EONIA swap rate is the fixed rate of a fixed-against-floating money market interest rate swap, where the floating rate is refixed daily at EONIA. EONIA is the Euro Overnight Interbank Average. This is calculated each business day in the Eurozone by averaging the overnight interbank deposit rates at which the banks in the EURIBOR panel have traded between midnight and 18:00 that day, with each rate weighted by the total volume of business done at that rate by the panel banks. Because it is the average price of overnight interbank deposits, EONIA is virtually a risk-free rate of return. An EONIA swap rate is largely the expected average of EONIA over the original term of the swap. The fact that EONIA swap rates are available for a range of terms, up to two years, allows comparison with term deposit and repo rates. The differential between EONIA swap rates and other rates largely represents credit and liquidity premiums (i.e. the compensation offered to lenders in return for taking credit and liquidity risks). Eurepo is an index of the GC repo rate for euro-denominated transactions. It is published daily for 10 terms, ranging between tom/next and 12 months, and is compiled on a similar basis to LIBOR and EURIBOR (i.e. an arithmetic average of rates taken from a middle range of quotes given at 11:00 by a panel of banks). For more details, go to www.eurepo.org. Similar GC repo indices are published by GovPX for USD repo (see www.govpx.com) and by the British Bankers Association (BBA) for GBP repo (see www.bba.org.uk).	EURIBOR and Eurepo Rates (1 month) - Click to enlarge Eurepo and EONIA Swap Rates (1 month) - Click to enlarge
Specials On occasion, buyers will seek a specific security as collateral in the repo market. Buyers will compete by offering cheaper cash than their competitors, so the repo rate for a security in demand will be forced below the GC repo rate. When this divergence of repo rates becomes apparent, the security concerned is said to have ‘gone on special’. The differential between the GC repo rate and the repo rate on a ‘special’ represents an opportunity cost to the buyer, as the buyer has had to sacrifice interest on its cash in order to acquire that security. It should be equivalent to the fee that the buyer would have to pay if it borrowed that same security in the securities lending market. If a security is subject to very intense demand, the borrowing fee may be large enough to force the repo rate on that security so far below the GC repo rate as to make it negative. This is not uncommon in equity repo and becomes more likely for all types of securities when interest rates in general are very low. Repo versus securities lending Securities lending is a financial activity comparable to repo and, in many cases, the two are substitutes for each other. In a securities lending transaction, one party gives legal title on a security to another party for a limited period of time, in exchange for legal ownership of a collateral asset. The first party is called the ‘lender’, even though the ‘lender’ is transferring legal title to the other party. Similarly, the other party is called the ‘borrower’, even though the ‘borrower’ is taking legal title to the borrowed security. The collateral assets in securities lending can either be other securities or cash (securities lending against cash collateral is operationally identical to a repo). The borrower pays a fee to the lender for the use of the loaned security. Securities lending against collateral in the form of other securities (non-cash collateral transaction) is illustrated in Figure 7.	Securities Lending Against Non-Cash Collateral - Click to enlarge
However, if cash is given as collateral, the lender is obliged to reinvest it for the borrower and to ‘rebate’ most of the reinvestment return to the borrower. This is done by deducting the borrowing fee from the rebate interest earned. Securities lending against cash collateral is illustrated in Figure 8. A primary difference between repo and securities lending is that repo is generally motivated by the need to borrow and lend cash, while securities lending is driven by the need to borrow and lend securities. However, there is an overlap in function between securities lending and the ‘specials’ segment of the repo market. Another key difference is that the repo market overwhelmingly uses bonds and other fixed-income instruments as collateral, whereas the core of the securities lending market is equities. Because the sale of equities transfers not only legal ownership, but also voting rights, it has become convention in the securities lending market for equities for loaned securities to be subject to a right of recall by the lender, in order to allow lenders to exercise their voting rights or other ownership options. In contrast, unless a right of substitution is agreed, an equity repo does not allow the seller to recall its securities during the term of the transaction.	Figure 8: Securities Lending Against Cash Collateral - Click to enlarge
Why use repo? The usefulness of repo to cash borrowers (or securities sellers) and cash lenders (or securities buyers) stems from the fact that lenders who use the repo market to invest their cash receive collateral in exchange. This has the effect of reducing credit risk. If the borrower defaults, the lender can liquidate the collateral to recover most or all of its cash. The attraction of the repo market for lenders is enhanced by the fact that the reduced credit risk on lending through repo means that their loans are subject to lower regulatory capital requirements than unsecured lending, which improves the return on their cash. For further details see page 43 – ‘Credit risk and capital charges’. There is the added advantage that, if required, they can re-use collateral to replenish their cash balances at any time during the term of the repo, by repo-ing the collateral on to a third party. This means that repo does not significantly deplete the liquidity of lenders, as does lending in markets with unsecured and non-transferable instruments like deposits. Reduced credit risk and lower regulatory capital charges on repo mean that investors are willing to lend more cash at lower rates in the repo market than they are in markets in unsecured instruments like deposits and CP. Lower funding costs and higher leverage obviously make repo an attractive source of cash for institutions buying assets that can be used as collateral (e.g. securities). Repo is particularly attractive to institutions that are already highly leveraged (e.g. securities firms and hedge funds), who would find it expensive and/or difficult to borrow more funds in unsecured markets. Indeed, repo is the primary source of funding for such institutions.	Figure 9: Financing a Long Position - Click to enlarge
Basic Uses of Repo From the perspective of a seller (who is usually a securities dealer), there are two principal uses of repo: Borrowing cash to fund long positions in securities or other assets. Borrowing securities to cover short positions in securities. Figure 9 illustrates the use of a repo to fund a long position in an asset, in this case, a bond: A dealer buys a bond in an outright purchase from the cash market. He is said to have gone ‘long’ the bond, which means that the dealer owns the bond and will profit from a rise in price and from the coupon. The dealer offers the bond as collateral to the repo market and uses the cash proceeds to pay for the outright purchase of the bond in the cash market. When the repo reaches its repurchase date, the dealer will repurchase the bond from the repo buyer and sell it back to the cash market. The repurchase price paid to the repo buyer is funded with the proceeds of selling the bond in the cash market. Of course, if the price of the bond has fallen during the term of the repo, the repo seller will suffer a loss on his long position when he sells the bond back to the cash market. Figure 10 illustrates the use of repo (strictly speaking, the use of reverse repo) to cover a short position in a specific security: A dealer sells a bond outright in the cash market. He does not own that bond and is said to have gone ‘short’ of the bond. At some point in the future, the dealer will have to buy the bond back from the cash market. However, that will be too late to be able to deliver the bond to the cash market to settle his initial sale. Therefore, between selling the bond and eventually buying it back, the dealer must borrow the bond. He will profit from a fall in its price during this interval. In order to borrow the bond, the dealer uses the cash proceeds of the outright sale in the cash market to buy the bond through a reverse repo (although the dealer is legally buying the bond from the repo market, it is only borrowing it in an economic sense, as it commits to sell the bond back to the repo market at a fixed repurchase price). When the reverse repo reaches its repurchase date, the dealer will buy the bond outright from the cash market in order to sell it back to his repo counterparty. The outright purchase is funded using the repurchase price received on the reverse repo. If the dealer succeeds in buying the bond outright from the cash market (and it is not always certain that it can), it will be able to fulfil all its delivery commitments and will cease to be short of the bond.	Figure 10 Covering a Short Position - Click to enlarge
Trading Strategies Financed or Covered by Repo Given that repo is used to finance long positions in securities and to cover short positions, it is a key component of securities trading strategies. Many strategies are non-directional, in that their profit or loss depends, not on a general shift upwards or downwards in the yield curve (and the consequent opposite movements in bond prices), but on a relative widening or narrowing of the spread between the yields on two similar securities, or between a security and a derivative. Yield curve trades In yield curve trades (in which the yield curve is expected to steepen or flatten), a long position is taken in bonds in which the yield is expected to fall, and an off-setting short position in bonds from the same issuer, but with a different maturity, in which the yield is expected to rise: repo is used to finance the long position and a reverse repo used to cover the short position.	Figure 11: Yield Curve Trades - Click to enlarge
Relative Value Trades Relative value trades are similar to yield curve trades, but are put on, not because the slope of the yield curve is expected to change, but because two bonds from the same issuer, but with different maturities, are trading away from the yield curve (at yields higher or lower than bonds of comparable maturity) and are expected to move back into line. A long position is taken in the bond that is trading at a yield higher than comparables and is fi nanced with repo. As this bond has a higher yield, it will also have a lower price, and is said to be ‘cheap’ compared to the rest of the market. An offsetting short position is taken in the bond that is trading at a yield lower than comparables and is covered with reverse repo. As this bond has a lower yield, it will also have a higher price, and is said to be ‘expensive’, ‘rich’ or ‘dear’ compared to the rest of the market.	Figure 12: Relative value trades - Click to enlarge
Carry Trades In carry trades, repo will be used to provide short-term financing for reinvestment in longer-term bonds (not necessarily in the same currency), in expectation of little or no change in the slope of the yield curve. The dealer will earn the spread between the bond yield and repo rate, provided the yield curve does not fl atten too much.	Figure 13: Carrying trades - Click to enlarge

Spread Trades

In spread trades, a short position in a bond from an issuer is offset by a long position in a bond from another issuer but of the same maturity, in expectation that the spread between their yields will widen or narrow, because of changes in credit and/or liquidity premiums. Spread trades are also undertaken between bonds and derivatives.

Example: One could simultaneously buy a government bond, finance it with overnight, tom/next or open repo, and sell an interest rate swap (pay fixed) of the same maturity. If the spread between the bond and swap curves widens relative to each other, one can sell off the bond at a lower yield/higher price, not roll-over the repo, and re-hedge the swap by buying a matching swap at a higher swap rate (i.e. receiving fixed on the new swap at the higher rate and continuing to pay fixed on the old swap at the lower rate).

A special type of cash-derivative spread trade can be initiated between cash government bonds and bond futures. This is called a ‘basis trade’.

Example: a long position is taken in a government bond and a simultaneous short position is taken in a futures contract on the bond. The long bond position is financed in the repo market until the futures delivery date. If the cost of buying the bond, and financing it in the repo market until the futures delivery date, is less than the payment due from the clearing house of the futures market upon delivery of the bond, then the three transactions will produce a certain, and therefore riskless, profit. This basis trade will be known as a ‘cash and carry arbitrage’.

However, it is also possible to take risk with basis trades. In this case, it is expected (but it is not certain) that, before the futures delivery date, it will be possible to close out the bond and futures positions at a profit (the repo will also have to be terminated). In the above example, having bought the cash bond and sold the futures contract, a profit will depend on the bond becoming relatively more expensive to the futures contract (which could mean the bond becoming more expensive, the future becoming cheaper, or both).

Who Uses Repo

Securities dealers

Repo originated as a means for securities firms (broker-dealers and investment banks) to fund the long positions in government bonds that they had acquired in their trading activities. The modern repo developed in the United States in the 1980s, and its development was driven by securities firms, which lacked access to retail or interbank deposits. Without repo, such firms had to borrow in the unsecured market by issuing CP and taking loans, both financed by commercial banks. The cost of such unsecured funds to securities firms was high, refl ecting the highly leveraged and risky nature of their business. The collateralised nature of repo allowed securities dealers to benefit from a reduction in the cost of funding and an increase in leverage. Direct access to end-investors also did away with the need of third-party intermediaries such as the commercial banks.

Highly leveraged investors

This category most obviously includes hedge funds and other ‘alternative investment’ companies. Like many securities firms, these institutions are relatively thinly capitalised and highly leveraged. The risk of lending to such institutions places tight limits on the quantity of unsecured credit that banks are willing to extend, as well as raising the cost of that credit. The collateralised nature of repo mitigates that risk and provides relatively cheap and plentiful leverage.

Prime brokers

Much of the borrowing in the repo market by securities firms is done indirectly on behalf of hedge funds by the prime brokerage units of these firms, which also provide securities lending, as well as services such as trade execution, risk management and clearing.

Repo conduits

These are Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), which are independent companies similar to trusts, set up to do reverse repo with securities firms. They finance themselves by issuing Asset-Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP) that is secured on the collateral received through their reverse repos. The collateral taken by repo conduits is typically illiquid and difficult to repo out into the main repo market.

Risk-averse cash investors

As explained earlier, repo offers lenders reduced credit and liquidity risks, and lower capital charges, and is therefore an ideal tool for cash investors with limited risk tolerance, including money market mutual funds and agent lenders in the securities lending markets.

Central banks

The primary role of a central bank is to manage the cost and quantity of credit in an economy, in order to control economic growth and the rate of inflation. To do this, most central banks intervene in the money markets (open market operations) in order to influence very short-term interest rates. Repo has become the preferred tool of central bank intervention around the world, because of the size of the repo market, its role in funding other financial markets and the fact that repo reduces credit risk being taken with public funds.

In normal market conditions, central bank repos are relatively small in scale when compared with the repo market between commercial institutions, but exert enormous influence given their impact on interest rate expectations.

Most central bank repo operations take place periodically at set times of the day, or week, using an auction mechanism, but the precise format differs between central banks, reflecting the different market practices in each country. In addition to official open market operations, central banks often use the repo market to commercially invest official foreign exchange reserves, typically against conservative collateral.

Central banks have responded to the recent severe shortages of liquidity in the financial markets by:

• widening the range of collateral that they are willing to buy through repos;
• extending the time for which they are willing to lend; • intervening more frequently than normal; and •          increasing the scale of their lending.

The Legal and Economic Character

Although the seller in a repo is supposed to give full legal ownership of collateral to the buyer for the term of the repo, the seller does not transfer the risk and return of repo on the assets. In other words, although the buyer is the owner of the collateral, if the value of the collateral falls during the term of the repo, the seller suffers the loss.

This paradox (owning but not taking the risk and return on an asset) arises because the seller is committed to repurchase the collateral on the repurchase date at a repurchase price fixed at the start of the transaction and equal to the purchase price plus a return on the use of the buyer’s cash. The fixed repurchase price means that, if the cash market value of collateral, less any initial margin/haircut, falls below the purchase price during the term of a repo, the seller has to repurchase at a loss, and vice versa.

As the seller bears the risk on the collateral used in a repo, the seller should receive the return on the collateral in compensation:

• In the case of the accrued interest on a coupon-bearing bond being used as collateral, this happens automatically. The seller commits to repurchase the bond at a fixed repurchase price, which does not take into account the accrual of coupon interest on the bond after the purchase date. So, the seller repurchases the income accrued during the repo for no extra cost. In effect, the additional accrued interest is paid to the seller automatically.
• If the coupon on a bond (or dividend on an equity) being used as collateral is paid during the term of a repo, it is actually paid to the buyer, because the buyer is the legal owner at the time. However, the buyer is subject to a contractual obligation, under the repo agreement, to make an equivalent payment to the seller either immediately (in the case of a repurchase agreement) or on the repurchase date (in the case of a buy/sell-back). For more on this so-called ‘manufactured payment’, see page 29 – ‘Income payments on collateral and manufactured payments’.

The fact that the risk and return on collateral in a repo remains with the seller is what makes repo a financing tool. It allows a dealer to buy an asset in the cash market in order to take a risk (in the hope of making a return) and simultaneously use the asset as collateral in the repo market to secure the money needed to pay for the asset. It would be self-defeating if use of the asset as collateral also transferred its risk and return to the buyer.

Managing Repo

Collateral is key to hedging the credit exposure of the buyer in a repo. Therefore, accurate valuation of collateral is critical. However, valuation can be challenging for less-liquid securities, particularly non-government bonds. There are various safeguards against uncertain valuation, as well as other risks, in the form of initial margins or haircuts, and frequent margin maintenance. It is also important to ensure secure custody of collateral. Instead of delivering collateral, which can be expensive and operationally risky, it is possible to outsource its custody, and the management of the repo, to a triparty agent. Another issue in managing repo is the possibility of ‘fails’ – a seller failing to deliver collateral at the start of a repo or a buyer failing to deliver at the end.

Valuation of Collateral

If the buyer in a repo has insufficient collateral to liquidate, in the event of a default by the seller, the buyer is taking an unnecessary credit exposure. On the other hand, if the buyer has more than enough collateral, the seller is losing the opportunity to borrow more cash by doing more repo. It is therefore important for both parties to a repo to accurately value collateral at the start and throughout the term of a transaction.

Challenges in valuing collateral arise because the degree of liquidity varies so widely among different types of securities. Ideally, a repo buyer has a valuation price for each security used as collateral and knows that it will be able to liquidate its entire holdings in those securities in the cash market at those prices.

Unfortunately, even if prices are readily available, the normal deal size in the cash market may be smaller than the buyer’s holdings. This means that large holdings would have to be sold in smaller lots, which would take time and would probably have to be sold at lower and lower prices. If collateral has to be liquidated during a market crisis, deal size may shrink or dealing may cease altogether.

If collateral takes the form of benchmark securities issued by major governments, then there is usually little problem in finding a good price at any time. However, the degree of liquidity falls away rapidly as one moves away from these securities to other types. In addition, non-government securities markets are more varied in terms of credit and liquidity risks, and some securities (e.g. asset-backed securities) are inherently difficult to value due to their complexity. During a crisis, the trading and the generation of accurate prices in such markets becomes less frequent. The pool of dealers and investors willing to trade these instruments may also thin out suddenly, and deal size usually shrinks.

Of course, buyers willing to accept collateral that is difficult to value will be offered higher repo rates for their cash. If the buyer is confident in the creditworthiness of the seller, then the possibility of having to liquidate the collateral may be perceived to be such a remote contingency that the extra return is more than adequate compensation for the risk. However, in all circumstances, it is prudent for buyers taking illiquid collateral to protect themselves with measures such as:

• initial margin and regular margin maintenance;
• secure legal agreements; and
• robust credit risk management and operational procedures.

Initial Margin

The initial margin (also known as the haircut) is the difference between the cash market value of the collateral and its purchase price in the repo market. It is a buffer that protects the buyer against a fall in the value of the collateral between the time of a default by the seller and the liquidation of the collateral by the buyer.

Example: Although a bond is valued at EUR 10 million in the cash market, a buyer (or cash provider) may only be willing to pay (or lend) EUR 9.8 million for that bond in the repo market. Of course, while the initial margin/haircut protects the buyer, it represents an unsecured credit exposure to the seller, who will typically incur regulatory capital charges on that exposure.

The principal reasons for a buyer insisting on an initial margin/haircut are:

• the illiquidity or complexity of collateral;
• the risky credit profile of the seller; and
• the increased riskiness of a transaction (e.g. if it was long term or undocumented).

Initial margins/haircuts therefore differ between deals and depend on the:

• type of collateral offered; • identity of the seller; and
• term of the repo.

However, there are recognised benchmarks for initial margins/haircuts (e.g. 2% for Eurozone government bonds in the European market and 5% or more for equities). Also, the greater use of non-government collateral has encouraged a more rigorous approach to setting initial margins and haircuts based on statistical measures of volatility.

In a repurchase agreement, which is a single legal contract, the initial margin/ haircut on the purchase price automatically cancels out any margin/haircut on the repurchase price and does not therefore affect the value of the repurchase agreement as a whole. However, in the case of an undocumented buy/sell-back, which is two separate legal contracts, the same is not true – you just end up with two badly valued transactions. Initial margins/haircuts are, therefore, not legally prudent in the case of traditional buy/sell-backs (they are nevertheless widely used in practice).

Margin Maintenance

This is a mechanism to maintain the initial relative value of the cash and collateral throughout the term of a repurchase agreement. If the market value of the collateral, less any initial margin/haircut, falls materially below the value of the cash (which is equal to the purchase price plus repo interest accrued since the purchase date), the buyer may make a margin call on the seller to restore the previous balance by providing more collateral or returning some cash. On the other hand, if the market value of the collateral rises materially above the value of the cash, the seller can make a margin call on the buyer. This means that the buyer may need to release some collateral or extend more cash.

It is typically up to the receiver of a margin call to decide how to answer the call. However, in practice, most margins take the form of additional collateral transfers rather than cash payments.

Margin maintenance involves the regular and frequent revaluation (marking to market) of collateral. Dealers would normally be expected to do this daily. The task obviously becomes more difficult with less liquid collateral.

Marking to market and the management of any consequent margin calls imposes a considerable operational burden on institutions. The burden of marking to market, particularly baskets of collateral and less liquid collateral, can be outsourced to a triparty collateral management agent.

The number and size of margin calls can be reduced by:

• netting the margin calls on individual repurchase agreements with the same counterparty that are governed under the same legal agreements; or
• imposing a margin threshold on net margin calls. This means not making a call unless the credit exposure, and therefore net margin required on all repo transactions with the same counterparty under the same legal agreement, exceeds a fixed level.

Setting a margin threshold means being ready to accept an unsecured credit exposure up to the threshold. A margin threshold is therefore a trade-off between operational cost and credit risk.

Where margin thresholds are set, it is also necessary to decide a minimum transfer amount (i.e. what size of margin call is triggered when the margin threshold is breached). It is usual practice to set the minimum transfer amount equal to the minimum threshold.

Example: If the margin threshold and minimum transfer amount are both set at

EUR 500,000, and the net credit exposure to a repo counterparty reaches EUR 650,000, the whole of that amount (EUR 650,000) is called as margin, with the aim of reducing the credit exposure to zero.

Margin calls and transfers cannot be accommodated in an undocumented buy/ sell-back. A contract between the buyer and seller applies only on the purchase date and on the repurchase date, so margin calls and transfers can only be made on those two days. This would be either too early or too late, respectively, to be of any practical use. There is therefore no margin maintenance with undocumented buy/sell-backs, which means that the value of collateral can diverge materially from the value of cash. Undocumented buy/sell-backs are consequently riskier than repurchase agreements and documented buy/sell-backs.

While traditional, undocumented buy/sell-backs do not allow margin maintenance because of their legal structure, margining is possible with documented buy/sellbacks. However, as there are often legal and operational obstacles to margining in jurisdictions where buy/sell-backs are commonly used, an alternative is provided to the margin top-up or cash-recall method used in repurchase agreements. This alternative is the early termination method. When parties wish to eliminate a difference between the values of cash and collateral, the buy/sell-back is terminated and a new transaction is simultaneously established for the remaining term to maturity. The only difference between the terminated and replacement transactions is that the amount of collateral or cash in the replacement transaction has been changed, to bring the values of the cash and collateral back into line.

Detailed guidance on margin maintenance is provided by the ICMA’s European Repo Council in the form of its Best Practice Guide to Repo Margining (available on www.icmagroup.org).

Rights of Substitution of collateral

It is possible for the buyer in a repo to give the seller, at the point of trade, one or several options to call upon the buyer, at anytime during the term of the repo, to return securities the buyer is holding as collateral and accept substitute securities of at least equal quality and value. Such rights of substitution give sellers (who are typically securities dealers) flexibility in managing their securities trading portfolios.

Example: If a dealer suddenly wishes to sell off a bond that is out on repo, provided that he secured a right of substitution when negotiating the transaction, he can retrieve the bond from the repo buyer and substitute another. Without rights of substitution, he would be obliged to wait until the repurchase date to retrieve the bond.

The substitute collateral offered by the seller must be acceptable to the buyer. The buyer must be reasonable in applying this restriction, but it may be prudent to avoid disputes by agreeing what securities are deemed acceptable substitutes in the agreement negotiated before the repo transaction starts.

Rights of substitution are very important in some jurisdictions, as this may be a pre-requisite to allow the parties to benefit from preferential balance sheet treatment of repo transactions (e.g. regulation FIN 41 in the United States).

In an undocumented buy/sell-back, the substitution of securities could only be made on the purchase date and on the repurchase date, which would be pointless. Markets in undocumented buy/sell-backs do not therefore offer rights of substitution, which makes them less flexible than repurchase agreements and documented buy/sell-backs, and restricts the terms for which buy/sell-backs are normally available.

Income Payments on Collateral and Manufactured Payments

Because the seller continues to bear the risk on collateral sold in a repo, the seller should receive the return on the collateral in compensation. However, when a coupon on a bond, or a dividend on an equity, is paid during the term of a repo, it is actually delivered to the buyer (because the buyer is the legal owner at the time). The problem is resolved by requiring the buyer to make an equivalent payment to the seller under a contractual obligation in the repo agreement. The equivalent payment is made, either immediately (in the case of a repurchase agreement), or deferred until the repurchase date (in the case of a buy/sell-back). This payment is known in the UK market as a manufactured payment or manufactured dividend.

If a coupon or dividend is paid on the collateral of an undocumented buy/sell-back, the manufactured payment cannot be made immediately (because the two legs of an undocumented buy/sell-back are separate contracts, the counterparties can only make payments or transfers on the purchase date or repurchase date). In this case, the buyer is supposed to retain the manufactured payment and reinvest it on behalf of the seller. The manufactured payment plus the reinvestment income is then deducted from the repurchase price, which the seller is due to make to the buyer on the repurchase date. However, agreement on a fair reinvestment rate can be a problem and dissuades most dealers from using, as collateral, securities that would pay a coupon or dividend during the term of an undocumented buy/sell-back.

Operational Control of Collateral

An important consideration in repo is which party has operational control or custody of collateral. Even though legal ownership is transferred to the buyer, establishing operational control is also important, as it avoids potential problems in accessing the collateral in case of counterparty default. There are three alternative approaches to the custody of collateral in repo.

• Hold-In-Custody (HIC) repo
• Delivery repo
• Triparty repo

Hold-In-Custody repo

Although the buyer acquires legal ownership of the collateral, the seller retains operational control in a HIC repo. Because there is no operational movement of collateral, HIC repos are cheaper to settle, which makes them especially useful for baskets of collateral, or collateral that is difficult to transfer, and offer a higher repo rate to the buyer. However, the buyer is subject to the risk of ‘double dipping’ – the possibility that the seller may fraudulently use the collateral for more than one repo. Double dipping was a serious problem in the US market in the 1980s.

Delivery repo

In a delivery repo, collateral moves from the securities account of the seller into the securities account of the buyer, across the settlement system for that security, and comes under the buyer’s direct operational control during the term of the repo. Delivery repo provides the greatest security to the buyer, but is a more expensive process than HIC repo, as it incurs a settlement fee on each issue.

Triparty repo

A triparty repo makes use of the fact that securities that can be used as collateral in repo may already be held on behalf of the buyer and seller by a common custodian. In a triparty repo, the custodian executes an internal transfer of collateral between the securities accounts of the two parties, and a counter payment between their cash accounts. Triparty repo therefore offers both the safety of delivery repo (since operational as well as legal control is transferred to the buyer) and the cost effectiveness of HIC repo (since collateral moves within the custodian rather than across settlement systems). It originated as an alternative to HIC repo following the double-dipping scandals in the United States. However, in Europe, its driving force is the operational convenience to repo counterparties. Triparty repo is covered in more details on page 33 – ‘Managing repo using triparty’.

Failure to deliver collateral

If a seller fails to deliver collateral on the purchase date, or the buyer fails to return collateral on the repurchase date, the consequences may be prescribed by regulation or by contract between the parties. In some countries, usually where the collateral is domestic government bonds, the law can prohibit failure to deliver collateral and impose penalties. In the international market, the terms of the Global Master Repurchase Agreement (GMRA) usually apply. Under the latest version of the GMRA, unless the parties agree otherwise, a failure by either party to deliver collateral is not an event of default. Alternative remedies are supplied:

• If the seller fails to deliver collateral on the purchase date, the buyer is not obliged to deliver the cash or, if the buyer has already done so, it can call for the return of the cash (failure by the seller to pay back the cash would be an event of default). However, although the seller does not have use of the cash, it continues to have an obligation to pay interest on the cash for the entire original term of the repo. Even if the seller delivers the collateral after the purchase date and therefore receives cash late, the seller will have to pay the same interest as if it had received the cash for the whole term. This interest is a penalty that should encourage sellers to remedy a failure to deliver collateral as soon as possible.
• If a buyer fails to return collateral on the repurchase date, under the so-called ‘mini close-out’ provisions of the GMRA, the seller can terminate the failed contract (but no other contracts) and charge the buyer the net cost of the termination, if this is greater than the cash value the seller is holding (i.e. the repurchase price). This procedure is different from the ‘buy-in’ provisions that apply to the cash market in securities, in which a party that has not received securities that it has bought outright can find an alternative seller and charge any extra cost of purchase to the failed seller. In a mini close-out in the repo market, the seller gets back cash. In a buy-in in the cash market, it can get securities. Failure to settle a mini close-out is an event of default.

Operational Risk Management

All the elements described earlier in this chapter represent different forms of operational risk. As a result, both parties need to rely on expert operational and efficiently scalable technical capabilities to mitigate these operational risks. The timely settlement of collateral movements and margin calls, as well as the timely detection and processing of corporate events, are essential in retaining the economic benefits of a repo. Managing operational risk is therefore key for any firm active in repos. Some may rely on their own internal operational capabilities and manage the related risks themselves, while others outsource this responsibility to a triparty agent.

Managing Repo Using Triparty Services

The role of a triparty agent

Triparty repo is an outsourcing solution offered by agent banks to institutions active in the repo market. The solution includes a series of independent collateral management services that support sellers and buyers in their repo transactions, from initiation to maturity.

The sellers and the buyers are capitalising on the expertise and dedicated infrastructure of specialised agents in order to while, at the same time, minimising back-office cue and IT investment.

By opting for this solution, both parties effectively will delegate all the day-today operational responsibilities relating to the repo to the agent. This will free up resources to focus on more productive activities, such as monitoring risk criteria in order to maximise business opportunities, given the risk appetite of their firm.

The tremendous success of this product over the last decade has demonstrated its attractiveness in terms of operational efficiency, risk management and cost. Moreover, given the low investment required to start operating, triparty has been the main entry point to the repo market for firms such as commercial banks, traditional money managers and corporate treasurers.

In a triparty repo, the two parties delegate the management of the collateral. This includes the selection and the automatic execution of collateral transfers, to a neutral agent, which ensures appropriate collateralisation of exposures by daily marking the value of the collateral to the market throughout the life cycle of the transaction. The agent acts as a common custodian for the collateral held on behalf of both parties.

It is however important to keep in mind that buyers receiving collateral in a triparty repo benefit from the same level of asset protection as if they were receiving the collateral bilaterally, as the triparty agent is not a principal in the transaction. The outsourcing solution supplements the underlying bilateral agreement and does not affect the transfer of ownership of the assets received as collateral. In a default, there is no difference in the treatment of collateral received bilaterally or in triparty. Buyers will benefit from the asset protection offered by the custodian holding the collateral and will have unrestricted access to the assets.

In addition to triparty repo, agents, including Euroclear Bank, offer triparty collateral management services for other collateralised transactions, such as:

• pledging collateral in securities lending transactions or secured loans; or
• The collateralisation of exposures arising from OTC derivatives.

The versatility of the triparty model allows firms to manage their collateralised exposures at firm level across many businesses and exposure types. This results in a greater optimisation of available collateral.

Another significant development of triparty is linked to the management of central bank liquidity. Because of its operational efficiency, robustness and scalability, a growing number of central banks are turning to triparty for the management of collateral received in open-market operations, as well as emergency liquidity schemes. This opens the way for a greater interaction between the interbank market and central bank credit, with greater liquidity in the market as a result.

Setting up triparty repo arrangements

Bilateral agreements, such as a GMRA, must first be in place before both parties negotiate a triparty service agreement with the triparty agent of their choice. The buyer will also set up dedicated securities accounts (in addition to its existing securities and cash accounts) to separate the collateral purchased through triparty repos.

Before entering into the transaction, each party also has to decide:

• what category of collateral it is willing to accept;
• how much of each category it is willing to accept; and
• What initial margin/haircut it will require in each category.

Collateral can be categorised in a wide variety of ways, such as:

• credit rating;
• market;
• type of security; and

Decisions about what is acceptable as collateral allow certain risks to be excluded altogether. Limits on how much of each category to accept enforce the diversification of collateral. Initial margin/haircuts provide a buffer against sudden and unexpected problems. Other criteria, such as limits on the minimum size of collateral allocated or stale prices, ensure a certain level of liquidity in the collateral portfolio. The wide-ranging spectrum of criteria warehoused by triparty agents gives buyers the opportunity to create collateral profiles that perfectly match the risk appetite of their firms. Both parties may agree to define multiple collateral profiles, or ‘baskets’. When trading, that allows them to vary the repo rate by varying the quality of the eligible collateral.

Example: A pool of collateral made of AAA sovereign securities will typically be traded below LIBOR, while a profile accepting lower-rated securities, such as BBB emerging-market securities, may be traded at a substantial spread over LIBOR.

Initiating a triparty repo

Once a triparty repo has been struck (typically over the phone), the counterparties notify the triparty agent of the specifications of the transactions (e.g. deal size, maturity and rate) and the collateral profile (or basket) to be used. If the instructions can be validated and matched by the agent, collateral is selected by the agent from the seller’s account using a standard algorithm and subject to the eligibility criteria of the profile selected. The agent then initiates the movement of cash and collateral between the accounts of the counterparties, on the basis of delivery versus payment, and reports settlement results to both parties.

Triparty online reporting tools (such as Euroclear Bank’s web-based application TriWeb) allow both parties to closely control and monitor outstanding transactions throughout the complete life cycle of the triparty repo. Data is regularly updated throughout the day, giving full transparency and the level of detail required by both the buyer and the seller. Those players using TriWeb can also take advantage of  its trading simulation tool in order to optimise business opportunities.

Collateral management bythe triparty agent

As the scope of eligible collateral is agreed upfront, all collateral management processes are performed directly by the agent. Subsequent to the execution of a triparty repo, and throughout the life cycle of the transaction, the agent continuously monitors the collateral to ensure that it remains:

• within the pre-agreed eligibility criteria (e.g. it could suffer a ratings downgrade); and
• sufficient (e.g. it could fall dramatically in value).

Should the value of the collateral fall below the exposure, the agent will automatically trigger a margin call and transfer additional collateral from the account of the seller to the buyer to cover the shortfall.

The main European triparty agents, including Euroclear bank, also offer unlimited rights of substitution to their clients during the life cycle of the repo.

Moreover, when a coupon on a bond or a dividend on an equity is paid during the term of the repo, the triparty agent will automatically transfer an equivalent amount from the buyer to the seller.

Increasingly, triparty agents offer dynamic management of collateral through a process called optimisation. This involves the continuous re-evaluation of the securities available to sellers for use as collateral (e.g. through new purchases), and the automatic substitution of collateral, to release the best collateral back to the seller by using the full range of eligibility specified by buyers.

Some triparty agents also allow buyers to re-use their collateral in a subsequent triparty deal. In other words, triparty clients are able to use collateral bought through one triparty repo (or another type of triparty transaction) in another triparty repo (or another type of triparty transaction), with no impact on the relationship between the original counterparties.

Example: Euroclear Bank has modified AutoSelect, its collateral allocation tools, to allow for re-use of collateral while keeping all key features characterising a triparty environment unchanged, including the substitution capability for the collateral giver.

The emergence of basket trading in triparty A significant, recent development in triparty repo is the emergence of ‘basket trading’, such as the EuroGC product recently launched by LCH.Clearnet Ltd, the UK-based Central Counterparty (CCP). By using this product, the seller and buyer can trade, on an anonymous basis, from standardised baskets of collateral (e.g. AAA sovereign bonds from the Eurozone). This is also known as ‘GC financing’. Trading firms agree that the collateral to be transferred from one to the other can be any of the securities listed in one or more standardised ‘baskets’. There is, therefore, no need for the seller and buyer to agree on the identity of individual lines of the collateral at the point of trade. Once struck, transactions will be sent to the CCP for netting. The result from the netting will then be forwarded to a triparty agent, such as Euroclear Bank, where the collateral traded will be automatically selected, by algorithm, from the account of the seller and transferred between the trading firms and the CCP. This product makes triparty repo akin to a deposit in terms of ease of dealing, while bringing all the benefits of secured transactions.

Trading Netting Allocation and settlement - Click to enlarge

The triparty repo market

Triparty repo originated in the United States in the 1980s as a solution to the problems of ‘double-dipping’ that arose with HIC repo. It was introduced to Europe in 1992. However, the two markets remain very different. In the United States, the bulk of repo is settled by triparty agents, whereas less than one-eighth of repo in Europe is triparty.

In both the United States and Europe, triparty repo has been used to outsource the management of collateral in which triparty agents can offer economies of scale to their users. However, in the US market, the collateral that is seen as benefiting the most from the economies of scale offered by triparty agents has been government and federal agency securities; whereas in Europe, it has been difficult-to-manage collateral such as ABS and corporate bonds (both markets use triparty repo for equity).

The reason seems to be that the very narrow margin earned by dealers on repos of US government and federal agency securities has encouraged them to cut settlement costs by outsourcing to triparty agents. In Europe, on the other hand, the heavy overheads involved in repo-ing non-government securities – which are more difficult to value and expensive to transfer – has encouraged dealers to use triparty for those products.

Another major difference between the United States and Europe comes from the operating model used by triparty agents for term repo transactions. In the United States, term repo transactions are, in effect, transformed into a series of overnight transactions. Transactions are unwound daily, returning the collateral to the seller and the cash to the buyer. This process enables the seller to use his securities for settlement purposes and to substitute other eligible collateral. As a result of the unwind, the buyer is secured with cash intra-day. Triparty agents offer such intraday financing to sellers and ensure the related exposure is properly collateralised by the seller. In Europe, triparty agents, such as Euroclear Bank, have developed their platform in such a way that collateral substitution can occur throughout the life cycle of the transaction, therefore there is no requirement to unwind transactions daily.

Alternative types of collateral

The bulk of collateral in most repo markets is comprised of domestic government bonds. These are ideal as collateral, being considered as free of default risk and are generally liquid. Prior to the recent crisis, there were growing repo markets in alternative collateral, offering higher returns than the increasingly commoditised government bond repo market. In absolute terms, the size of the alternative collateral market in Europe is still much smaller than that in government bonds and has been set back by the market crisis. Non-government bond repos are sometimes collectively described as ‘credit repo’, as illustrated in Figure 15.

Figure 15: Repo collateral - Click to enlarge

Credit repo

There are five main sub-categories of credit repo:

• covered bonds^[1], such as German Pfandbrief
• other Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBSs)
• other Asset-Backed Securities (ABSs)

‘Covered bonds’ are a type of asset-backed security in which the assets (mortgages or loans to the public sector) are secured by a special body of public law, rather than contract law. The assets also remain on the balance sheet of the issuer, rather than being sold off balance sheet to an SPV, but are legally ring-fenced in the event of the issuer’s insolvency. This should make them more secure than off-balance sheet asset-backed securities.

• structured credit securities, such as Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDOs)
• unsecured corporate bonds

Covered bonds, MBSs, ABSs and structured credit securities can serve as good collateral, if they are secured against high-quality underlying assets. This is usually assumed to be the case for covered bonds, given the special legal security underpinning these bonds. However, liquidity can still be an issue because of the buy-and-hold nature of many investors in these securities and the generally small issue size. Attempts have been made to address these problems with the invention of ‘Jumbo’ Pfandbrief.

European ABSs can be problematic as collateral because of their illiquidity, their often specialised underlying assets, and the consequently small size of many ABS issues. These problems can be compounded by the complexity of their structures (e.g. the prepayment options embedded in the securities). This makes it difficult to value some ABSs. Attempts are being made to improve liquidity by pooling the prices quoted by market-makers in ABSs and prices derived from theoretical models developed by specialised firms.

Structured credit securities such as CDOs have suffered a drastic reappraisal of their credit quality following the onset of the US sub-prime mortgage crisis in 2007, as investors worried about the complexity of structures and the potential for further hidden risks.

Unsecured corporate bonds vary widely in credit quality and liquidity. In many cases (e.g. US automotive companies), good liquidity has been marred by poor credit ratings, thereby complicating their use as collateral.

Equity repo        

Equity poses special challenges when used as collateral:

• There are no generally accepted equity valuation models.
• The greater credit and liquidity risk in equities compared to fixed-income securities is reflected in the more volatile prices of individual equities.
• Liquidity is restricted by the fact that equities are traded in much smaller amounts than fixed-income securities.
• Equities are subject to ‘corporate events’, in which the nature and value of the security may suddenly change (e.g. rights issues, stock splits, non-cash payments of dividends).
• Equities also carry voting rights, which means that equity repos have implications for the ability of the seller to exercise its corporate governance rights and obligations.
• In contrast to many bond markets, equities pay income net of withholding tax. Standard repo agreements require manufactured payments to be made gross, regardless of whether or not the corresponding payment to the buyer has been made gross.

These challenges are addressed in a number of ways:

• Equity repo is largely in securities included in the main equity indices. These benefit from a broad base of investors as well as the price transparency of stock exchanges and electronic trading systems. Baskets comprising the main equity market indices are also widely traded, reflecting the composition of underlying trading in equity derivatives.
• Equity repos often use non-index baskets containing multiple securities, in order to achieve a reasonable transaction size and to produce an average volatility lower than the volatility of individual equities.
• Special annexes are used to adapt standard repo agreements to deal with equity corporate events, by defining ‘equivalent securities’ after there has been a corporate event on the collateral. They also make provisions for net manufactured payments, although (in contrast to securities lending agreements) the default provision is to substitute the collateral or terminate the transaction before the tax event.

The complexity and expense of using equity as collateral means that virtually all equity repo is done through triparty arrangements.

Emerging market repo

It is difficult to define an emerging market. There is no generally accepted definition. Emerging market indices are distorted, as their composition is dictated by the availability of securities from emerging market issuers. The term is also complicated by the transformation of some emerging markets into developed markets (e.g. Mexico and Korea are now members of the OECD, formerly seen as an ‘industrialised’ country club) and the BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are identified as special cases of transition.

In a very general sense, labelling a market as ‘emerging’ indicates a special challenge. It is not that emerging markets pose risks that are different to those in developed markets, but there is a tendency for those risks to be more intense. This is particularly true of political risk, in other words, the instability of the government and the possibility of arbitrary political interference in markets. Many emerging markets are also small economies and/or dependent on exports of commodities over which they have no price control, which makes them very vulnerable to shocks in the global economy. They also, almost by definition, suffer from an undeveloped infrastructure, not just physical but in terms of legal, financial and commercial sophistication.

Of course, as well as the risks, emerging markets offer the potential rewards of a new frontier. Specifically, the main drivers behind emerging market trading in all instruments are:

• access to a new class of credit risk for reasons of portfolio diversification by investors;
• the higher relative yield compared to developed markets; and
• fi rst-mover advantage for dealers.

Although transacted in smaller sizes than government bond repo, normal deal size in emerging market repo is larger than other types of credit repo.

About George Dorgan

George Dorgan (penname) predicted the end of the EUR/CHF peg at the CFA Society and at many occasions on SeekingAlpha.com and on this blog. Several Swiss and international financial advisors support the site. These firms aim to deliver independent advice from the often misleading mainstream of banks and asset managers. George is FinTech entrepreneur, financial author and alternative economist. He speak seven languages fluently.

My articlesMy siteAbout meMy books
Follow on:LinkedINTwitterSeeking AlphaCFA SocietyEconomicBlogs