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

Academics and industry unite

The gargantuan impact of systemic risk in global financial markets has been corroborated by a consortium of industry and academics collaborating to provide independent quantitative research, insight and leadership on systemic risk. Driven by director of MIT’s Laboratory for Financial Engineering,  Andrew Lo, senior managing director at State Street Global Markets, Jessica Donohue, and managing

Rethink remuneration

Institutional investors around the world have been lobbying for the right to have a say on pay, a right to have an input into the remuneration of the executives in the companies they invest in. In June the UK’s business secretary, Vince Cable, laid out new plans that will give shareholders three-yearly votes on executive

Endowments fall
from grace

US college and university endowments have gone from pioneers in the adoption of socially responsible investing (SRI) to markedly trailing the rest of the investment industry in integrating environmental social and corporate governance (ESG), new research reveals. The Boston-based Tellus Institute, an independent not-for-profit think-tank, looked at 464 endowments and was damning in its findings,

Kay Review recommendations tackle short-termism

Co-head of responsible investment at the £32 billion Universities Superannuation Scheme, David Russell, says asset manager engagement with companies should move away from its “almost myopic focus on remuneration” to other issues that impact value and strategy. His comments come on the back of the final report of the Kay Review of the UK equity

POLL: Which strategy within emerging markets debt do you find the most compelling?

mrec4inarticleinline Sponsored Content scnative1 scnative2 scnative3

CalPERS: “opaquely transparent”

A Columbia Business School case study on CalPERS has criticised the fund for being “opaquely transparent”, with a computation of investment expenses revealing the fund pays three-to-four times its peers in fees. Written by Columbia professor of business Andrew Ang and Columbia CaseWorks fellow, Jeremy Abrams, Californian dreamin’: The mess at CalPERS examines the political,

Previous