The report’s key findings are:
- CCPs have sufficient buffers to withstand adverse market
developments in combination with the default of the two clearing members
with the largest exposures;
- Gaps are identified between the necessary and available buffers for
concentration risks for some CCPs, particularly in commodity derivatives
markets;
- CCPs remained overall resilient despite increased market volatility in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine;
- For operational risk, differences in terms of risk sources,
exposures and mitigation tools across CCPs are observed and need to be
further assessed on an individual basis before issuing potential
recommendations; and
- Most of the analysed operational events stem from third-party
services, whereas a number of critical third-party service providers
have the potential to affect the critical functions of multiple CCPs in a
correlated manner.
Klaus Löber, Chair of the CCP Supervisory Committee, said:
“ESMA’s fourth stress test found that the European clearing market is
resilient and capable of withstanding severe stress scenarios, although
certain areas need further strengthening. CCPs’ resilience was
confirmed during the real-life market stress following Russia’s invasion
of Ukraine.
“CCPs are of critical importance to the stability of the financial
system and the failure of one CCP has the potential to cause serious
systemic risk across the EU. Therefore, stress testing CCPs is a key
supervisory tool to understand the clearing industry, identify issues
relevant for financial stability and eventually mitigate systemic risk,
contributing to ESMA’s mission.”
CCP stress test scenarios and outcomes
A total of 15 CCPs were covered by the exercise, including two UK
CCPs qualifying as Tier 2 CCPs. The exercise assessed credit and
concentration risk and included a new operational risk component that
aimed to assess the resilience of CCPs to operational events and
failures of third-party service providers.
Operational risk analysis
ESMA identified varying degrees of operational reliability for the
CCPs included in the exercise and identified specific CCPs where further
work should be conducted to understand the drivers of these
differences, the root causes of the events, and the remediation actions
taken.
ESMA also evaluated the exposure of CCPs to critical third-party
service providers and the ability of CCPs to reduce risk through
operational risk management tools. Through this process, ESMA identified
differences across CCPs in their relative level of third-party risk as
well as the critical third-party service providers with the highest
systemic importance for the CCP sector. Further work is needed to
analyse exposures to third-party service providers both at an individual
CCP level, as well as system wide, to further strengthen operational
resilience.
Credit Stress Test
Two default scenarios, combined with the common ESRB market stress
scenario, were run on two different reference dates, 19 March (end of
day) and 21 April 2021 (intraday snapshot).
For 19 March 2021, the impact due to concentration and specific
wrong-way risk stemming from cleared positions was also included in the
baseline scenario calculations. The first scenario concerned a Cover-2
default per CCP, where the default of two clearing member groups under
common price shocks is assumed separately for each CCP. The second
scenario was an All-CCPs Cover-2 default, involving a default of the
same two groups for all CCPs in the system, designed to assess the
resilience of CCPs collectively to the market stress scenario. ESMA did
not detect any major systemic risk concerns under the tested credit
scenarios.
Concentration Stress Test
The European-wide concentration analysis performed on 19 March 2021
shows that concentrated positions represent a significant risk for CCPs.
For most asset classes, concentrated position risk is clustered in one
or two CCPs. The analysis found that concentration risk is factored in
explicitly in a majority of CCPs, through dedicated margin add-ons.
Concentration modelled for commodity derivatives and the equity
segment (securities and derivatives) is significant, with around 7bn EUR
of concentration risk calculated for each asset class. There is a large
coverage gap between the system-wide estimated market impact and margin
add-ons for commodity derivatives and to a lesser extent for equity
products. The concentration risk for emission allowances stands at 2.5bn
EUR and is not adequately covered per the ESMA methodology.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
During the time of finalisation of the exercise, Russia’s invasion of
Ukraine led to extreme market movements for instruments across the
commodities and energy markets. ESMA concludes that the ESRB scenario is
overall of greater or comparable severity for most asset classes, but
of a lesser severity for some products, especially for power and gas
derivatives. ESMA, in coordination with national competent authorities,
also closely monitored the financial impacts that the invasion has had
on CCPs. Overall, ESMA notes that CCPs remained resilient during the
crisis, despite the extreme prices and increased market volatility.
Next steps
As with previous exercises, the ESMA stress test exercise for CCPs
was not aimed at assessing the compliance of the CCPs with regulatory
requirements, nor at identifying any potential deficiency of the stress
testing methodology of individual CCPs. However, in line with the EMIR
mandate, where the assessments expose shortcomings in the resilience of
one or more CCPs, ESMA will issue the necessary recommendations.