Press Release: ESMA finds data quality significantly improves under new monitoring approach
3rd annual edition
New approach to data monitoring:
More data-driven and outcome-focused approach to data monitoring
Collaborating with the NCAs on data quality issues
Centralised data quality dashboard
EU-wide indicators covering the most fundamental data quality aspects under EMIR
Data sharing framework that enables relevant authorities to follow up with counterparties when potentially significant data quality issues are detected
Significant quality improvements
Increased use of transaction data by EU financial regulatory authorities
New: analysis of MiFiR transaction data
Report: 2022 Report on Quality and Use of Transaction Data 19/04/2023
How is the reported data used?
NCAs, ECB and ESRB
Monitoring of;
Key trends in EU derivatives markets (2.2.1)
Derivatives exposures (2.2.2)
E.g. tools to monitor financial exposures of funds, CCPs, financial intermediaries and other financial market participants
Market abuse behaviour (2.2.3)
Risk of specific segments and asset types (2.2.4)
E.g. assess the impact of the 2020 short selling bans jointly by the AFM and AMF
Reporting obligation (2.2.5)
e.g. timeliness and completeness of reporting.
Performed through the implementation of dashboards with indicators automatically flagging any issues
ESMA
Macro-level research, support of policymaking and supervision/supervisory mandates. E,g,
Reports
Policymaking
Supervision (2.3.6)
Direct supervisory mandates: e.g. TRs, ARMs and APAs
support NCAs supervisory mandates of reporting participants
Monitoring
ESMA’s new approach to monitoring data quality
Data quality dashboards (3.2)
EMIR started in May 2022
SFTR to be implemented in 2023
Compares data quality for a country against EU benchmark
Contains 19 Data Quality Indicators (DQIs) e.g.
under-reporting
over-reporting
inconsistent reporting vis-à-vis the other counterparty
incomplete information in the key fields of the reports
late reporting
abnormal values
incorrect identifiers of the counterparties
Results are presented to and discussed with the NCAs experts
NCAs data sharing and follow-up on significant data quality issues (3.3)
Goal: ensure resolution of the most critical data quality problems
Criteria has been set to determine which reporting issues should be considered significant
Follow-up is focused on a limited # of entities with the highest volume of incorrect reports at EU level
Individual entities may be approached, e.g. when they report abnormal/incorrect values on such a scale that it may materially impact the analysis of EMIR data
Framework used 4 times since 2022;
Implausible notional/quantity and incorrect margins under EMIR
Abnormal number of reports submitted by a single entity under EMIR
Implausible loan values under SFTR
EMIR DQIs indicating issues for 67 entities in 18 Member States
# of trades vs # of positions
empty/abnormal maturity date
0 valuation
Key developments affecting data quality
EMIR
EMIR Refit (4.1.1)
Guidelines, xml schema, validations all publish Dec 22 – to give market time to prepare for data quality before go live.
Guidelines: facilitate ensuring compliance with the revised rules
EMIR DQIs (4.1.2)
DQI 1: discrepancies # of level T records between two counterparties
Worst = 25% in Sep-21. Dec-22 = 15%
DQI 2: discrepancies # of level P records between two counterparties
Worst = 27.6% in Mar-20, Dec-22 = 7.8%
DQI 8 – late valuations
Worst = 38.3% in Mar-20, Dec-22 = 13.2%
DQI 9 – missing or abnormal maturity
Fluctuates between 10% and 16% of data
DQI 10 – missing valuations
Worst = 23.8% in 2019, 2022= 14.3%
Misreporting of notional/quantity (4.1.2.2)
Implausible values identified from 1 entity in fields ‘Notional’ and ‘Quantity’ for CO FU records
Affecting a large percentage of EU CO FU flow
Inconsistencies in use of collateral update records also identified
ESMA spoke with NCA who spoke with entity directly
EMIR Remediation (from supervisory reviews) (4.1.3)
SFTR
MiFIR
Supervisor of significant DRSPs (4.2.1)
ESMA now responsible for supervision of DRSPs (previously was NCAs)
ARMs = 50%+ of flow of MiFIR TR in EU. The remaining reported directly by investment firms or trading venues.
Timeliness of publication (APA) (4.2.2)
Minimal delay in the dissemination of trade information to the public.
Analysis of MiFIR data affecting policy making
Consistency of transaction and transparency data (4.2.6)
Project underway – results expected in Q1 2023
APAs Transparency data outliers (4.2.7)
ESMA test bonds: avg volume is in line with similar products in the same market
Outliers excluded from transparency calcs
Conclusion and next steps
“ESMA plans to further intensify and industrialise the use of transaction data and to explore innovative ways to obtain greater intelligence from the reported data”
Expand use of EMIR DQIs in 2023
SFTR DQIs in 2023
Prepare dashboard for REFIT
Monitor TRs reports