Regulatory competition and the efficiency of alternative derivative product margining systems
Although margin requirements would arise naturally in the context of unregulated trading of clearinghouse-guaranteed derivative contracts, the margin requirements on U.S. exchange-traded derivative products are subject to government regulatory oversight. At present, two alternative methodologies are used for margining exchange-traded derivative contracts. Customer positions in securities and securities options are margined using a strategy-based approach. Futures, futures-options, and securities-option clearinghouse margins are set using a portfolio margining system. This study evaluates the relative efficiency of these alternative margining techniques using data on S&P500 futures-option contracts traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. The results indicate that the portfolio margining approach is a much more efficient system for collateralizing the one-day risk exposures of equity derivative portfolios. Given the overwhelming efficiency advantage of the portfolio approach, the simultaneous existence of these alternative margining methods is somewhat puzzling. It is argued that the co-existence of these systems can in part be explained in the context of Kane's (1984) model of regulatory competition. The efficiency comparison also provides insight into other industry and regulatory issues including the design of bilateral collateralization agreements and the efficiency of alternative schemes that have been proposed for setting regulatory capital requirements for market risk in banks and other financial institutions
|Date of creation:||1996|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20551|
Web page: http://www.federalreserve.gov/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/feds/fedsorder.html|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- George W. Fenn & Paul H. Kupiec, 1991. "Prudential margin policy in a futures-style settlement system," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 164, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
- Black, Fischer, 1976. "The pricing of commodity contracts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1-2), pages 167-179.
- Dimson, Elroy & Marsh, Paul, 1995. " Capital Requirements for Securities Firms," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(3), pages 821-51, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedgfe:96-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Marlene Vikor)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.