Suspend securities lending: Watson Wyatt

Asset consultant Watson Wyatt has recommended that its global clients suspend their securities lending programmes if they have any doubt about their arrangements with lending agents.

In a note to clients this week, the firm said that the risk reward trade off for securities lending had changed, and in some instances, may not even be worthwhile anymore.

Watson Wyatt cited events such as the demise of Lehman Brothers, government restrictions on short selling, and the underperformance of money-market funds in particular for putting pressure on the lending industry.

To identify the potential risks a lending agent might pose, the firm told its clients to research collateral types and amounts, reinvestment guidelines (in the event that cash collateral was taken), counterparty restrictions and any collateral indemnification provisions provided by the lending agent.

If any of these were perceived to carry too much risk, Watson Wyatt suggested that clients should suspend their securities lending programmes immediately, although for some funds with principal losses in their cash collateral or mark-to-market losses related to liquidity, this might incur an exiting cost, unless the lending agent had made a compensatory concession.

Sponsored Content

Some agents may restrict a wholesale withdrawal from their programs, Watson Wyatt warned.

For some funds, a gradual withdrawal might be more appropriate, but in this event Watson Wyatt recommended funds review their lending guidelines. The firm said it would be prudent to increase collateral requirements, review the list of borrowers, review the indemnification structure, and change the cash collateral reinvestment guidelines.

Funds with non-cash collateralised lending should be able to suspend lending immediately, Watson Wyatt said.

Leave a Comment

Sort content by

Breaking bad habits: why investors aren’t good at asset allocation

Institutional investors act like momentum investors, chasing returns, even over longer time horizons according to Asset Allocation and Bad Habits, a new research paper that looks at the impact of past returns on asset allocation. The paper commissioned by Rotman-ICPM and authored by Amit Goyal professor at Univeriste de Lausanne, Andrew Ang professor at Columbia Business

Is in-house management the future for large asset owners?

The allure of potentially higher net returns from portfolios precisely tailored to values, beliefs and risk appetite is hard for any asset owner to ignore, yet needs to be balanced against the many challenges associated with managing assets in-house. To this end, it is worth outlining the key benefits that in-house asset management can offer.

Addressing shortcomings in current corporate reporting

Investors don’t have access to all the information they need today. Raj Thamotheram, Mark Van Clieaf and Alan Willis ask: why aren’t investors (and their clients) demanding it? Without relevant, timely and reliable information, investors are unable to make informed long-term investment decisions. The efficiency of capital markets in allocating invested funds – the only real value of

To invest in China today you must be at the head of the kewfie

Regulatory proposals announced in April mean that in October foreign investors will be able to buy the top shares listed on the Chinese mainland stock exchange within annual quota limits. The momentum of market liberalisation is such that MSCI is considering using such A shares in its emerging market indices, a move that will take Chinese

Chinese SWFs need co-investors

China’s biggest sovereign wealth funds need, and want, co-investment opportunities in real assets and private equity and are open to new partnerships with international investors of the right credentials, and the longer term the partnership the better. This is the feedback of Michael Wadley, a specialist lawyer of Australian origin based in Shanghai, who runs

Foundations and endowments flock to long duration

The risk of a US equity market decline and concerns over the future direction of interest rates has been driving US foundations and endowments’ asset allocation decisions in the past year, with a distinct move away from US equity to global allocations and away from US-focused core to longer duration and high yield. The latest

Previous