Fixed Income Evaluated Pricing: Transparency and Tribulations
Report Summary
Fixed Income Evaluated Pricing: Transparency and Tribulations
The industry emphasis on validation has increased reliance on third-party data as well as secondary and tertiary pricing sources.
London, 18 August 2016 – Firms’ evaluated pricing methods and data sources have come under intense scrutiny post-2008, as regulators and clients have increased their focus on fair value due diligence for fixed income instruments. Changes in accounting standards across the globe over the last three years and the ongoing barrage of regulatory requirements (such as the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive’s extension to additional asset classes) have added weight to firms’ investment in this area; the days of relying on a single broker quote for these instrument types are long gone. No doubt, tough times are ahead, and given the austere economic outlook, fixed income yields are likely to exacerbate the problem.
This report, the first in a series of two, assesses the industry’s progress toward addressing fixed income valuation challenges and looks at internal and external drivers for investment in valuations data. It is based on a 2015 online Aite Group survey and Aite Group phone interviews conducted with operations and technology executives engaged in the oversight of evaluated pricing for fixed income instruments at financial institutions across the globe.
This 28-page Impact Report contains 21 figures and one table. Clients of Aite Group’s Institutional Securities & Investments service can download this report.
This report mentions Bloomberg, FactSet, ICE Data Services (previously Interactive Data), MarketAxess BondTicker, Markit, Morningstar, MTS Data, PricingDirect, SIX Financial Information, S&P Capital IQ, and Thomson Reuters.