This paper looks at non-default losses (NDL) at CCPs and covers who should pay for what types of these losses. The paper also analyses resolution tools for non-default losses and demonstrates each of these tools on the balance sheet of a simplified CCP.
The guiding principle for allocating NDL should be who manages the risk. In line with this principle we propose for the allocation of NDL:
- In order to properly incentivise CCPs to exercise prudent risk management, CCPs and their shareholders should bear almost all NDL, in particular the entire non-default losses related to risks that are exclusively within their control. That is, CCPs should bear all NDL related to:
• operational risks.
• general business risks.
• legal risks.
• cyber risks.
• fraud (or other internal ‘bad acts’). - In some instances, clearing members and their clients may bear at least a portion of NDL related to custodial risks, settlement bank risks and investment risks. These instances are described in more detail below.
For NDL that a CCP bears itself, the CCP’s parent company and/or equity holders should bear the remaining losses in the event that a CCP’s capital or other dedicated funding is insufficient.
None of the resolution tools we analysed (cash calls, bridge CCP, write-down-and-conversion tool, variation margin gains haircutting) will provide outcomes in line with the no-creditor-worse safeguard, other than the write-down-and-conversion tool, which is very complex and might not always work if initial margin is safeguarded. None of these tools are necessary if CCP equity is sized correctly.
Documents (1) for CCP Non-Default Losses
Latest
ISDA Letter to CFTC on Public Interest Determinations for Event Contracts
On July 27, ISDA submitted a letter to the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) on the CFTC’s proposed rulemaking on public interest determinations for event contracts published in the Federal Register on June 12, 2026. ISDA emphasized the importance...
ISDA Letter to BCBS on RMA Models
On July 24, ISDA wrote to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) to request guidance on how the proposed Risk Mitigation Accounting (RMA) model under International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9/IFRS 7 should be treated for prudential regulatory capital...
US Treasury Repo Clearing Indicators June 2026
The ISDA-Actrix US Treasury Repo Market Clearing Indicators illustrate central clearing adoption in the US Treasury repo market. Sponsored cleared repo volumes are used as a proxy to monitor client participation in central clearing, a key objective of the Securities...
Australia: ISDA responds to ASIC consultation on pre-hedging guidance
On July 27, ISDA submitted a response to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's (ASIC) consultation on its proposed regulatory guide on pre-hedging. ISDA's response emphasises the importance of international consistency, including alignment with the International Organization of Securities Commissions'...
