Latest News:
Interoperability for clearing of OTC derivatives including credit default swaps, which has been championed by some corners of the industry, is unlikely to become a reality for many years, according to Michael Davie, CEO of SwapClear, which is owned by LCH Clearnet.
"When I talk to regulators and governments the word that comes up all the time is interoperability," Davie said at an Isda conference yesterday. "But anybody who thinks interoperability is a salvation in the near term is crackers. At best the road to OTC interoperability is very long."
While it might be desirable for a domestic CCP operating in global market place to operate as a global CCP, differences in jurisdictions and legal infrastructures meant it was unlikely to happen "in our professional lifetime," Davie said.
Interoperability would enable one party to a CDS trade to clear at CME Clearing while the other clears at ICE Clear, for example. After some hesitation earlier in the year, regulators opted to include in European Market Infrastructure Regulations an interoperability clause for cash equities, but failed to include a matching provision for OTC derivatives.
Davie's view was backed by other clearing house operators speaking at the Isda regional conference in London.
"The G20 said one of their key concerns was interconnectedness - but in fact interoperability is the same thing," said Paul Swann, CEO of ICE Clear Europe. " Do we really want to introduce a new form of connectivity into the financial system?"


It is recommended that you do not log out if you regularly access Creditflux on this computer.
Once you have logged out you will need to re-register by entering your email address and receiving an email from us to gain access.
Click here if you are sure you want to log out.

Already a registered user? Click here to login.

This article is only available
to Creditflux subscribers.
Already a subscriber? Click here.
As a part of your trial subscription
you will receive:


Bookmarking this article will save it in your membership area for your reference at a later date. You can bookmark as many articles as you like.
To access your membership area click here or on 'Manage My Account' located in the top right hand corner of any page. You must be logged into the site to use this feature.
For help, please contact us on
+44(0) 20 7253 9510.
Interoperability is a term that can mean different things to different people. Maintaining economically fungible (but not offsetting) positions at different clearinghouses and having margin offsets or agreements to liquidate across entities certainly poses legal and operational risks. I agree with that premise. However, allowing the owner of the position - the customer or house - the right to access its own open interest to permit the transfer of the position and associated margin from clearinghouse A to clearinghouse B for the purposes of effecting margin savings or position offset does not create such risks. As CEO of ELX, I tried to achieve such an end by asking the CFTC to approve post-trade position transfers between clearinghouses. After more than a year, the Commission denied the request, butin voluminous correspondence the Commission never found any issue of risk to the system or legal uncertainty to the financial system from our proposal. Rather, the CFTC left the matter of post-trade position transfers to the clearinghouses to accept or not. This kind of "interoperability" is far from impossible to achieve, but competitive concerns across entities and jurisdictions stand in the way - not operational risk or legal uncertainty.
Neal Wolkoff