MFA Comment Letters

Topic: index derivatives

MFA and AIMA Submit Joint Letter to ESMA in Response to Call for Evidence on Short Selling Regulation03.15.13


MFA and AIMA jointly submitted a comment letter to ESMA responding to its Call for Evidence regarding its evaluation of […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: ESMA European Securities and Markets Authority, AIMA, Alternative Investment Management Association, European Parliament, Council of the European Union, short selling, credit default swap, CDS, short selling regulation, Europe, equity, assets under management, AUM, harmonization, competent authorities, reporting requirements, short positions, European Commission, operational challenges, short selling bans, market participants, securities, sovereign issuer, capital, liquidity, price discovery, market distortions, hedging, risk, sovereign debt, Latvia, bond, sovereign bonds, EU Member State, futures, futures market, public disclosure, stock, reverse engineer, efficiency, short squeeze, volatility, reporting obligation, T+1 reporting, hedge funds, price formation, corporate issuer, Lehman Brothers, duration, delta, derivatives, share capital, index derivatives, AIFMD, MiFID, EMIR, net short position, Belgium, Finland, Germany, Netherlands, BaFin, United Kingdom, Commissione Nazionale per le Societa e la Borsa, Committee of European Securities Regulators, CESR, issued share capital, T+2, Bundesanstalt fur Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht, settlement, locate, prime broker, index, third party managers, technical standards, non-EU investment firms, extraterritoriality, reasonable expectation, uncovered sovereign CDS, eurozone, mark-to-market, single-name CDS, France, Spain, Italy, trading volume, Steven Maijoor, bid-ask spreads, price efficiency, derivative instrument, depositary receipts, London Stock Exchange, PRNewswire, Stock Exchange Daily Official List, compliance, market disruption, interpretive guidance,

Comment Letter to the SEC and CFTC on Definitions of “Swap Dealer, Security-Based Swap Dealer (together, SDs), Major Swap Participant, Major Security-Based Swap Participant (together MSPs) and Eligible Contract Participant (ECP)02.22.11


MFA submitted a comment letter to the SEC and CFTC on their joint proposed rule to further define swap dealer, […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: Commodity Futures Trading Commission Securities Exchange Commission, CFTC, SEC, Swaps dealer, SD, Security-Based Swap Dealer, Major Swap Participant, Major Security-Based Swap Participant, msp, security-based swaps, market activity, market growth, systemic risk, United States financial markets, potential future exposure test, systemically important, MSP thresholds, Dealer, end-users, default risk, risk-mitigating tools, hedge fund managers, potential future exposure calculation, over-collateralization, current uncollateralized outward exposure test, independent amount of collateral, initial margin, mark-to-market exposure, ISDA master agreements, daily variation margin calls, valuation of collateral, future exposure discount, centrally cleared positions, central clearing, clearing member defaults, clearinghouse, variation margin, daily volatility, risk mutualization, discount factor, independent variable, tools of credit protection, reproducible test, credit default swaps, CDS, index CDS, unpaid premiums, portfolio risk, fixed downside risk, interest rate swap, LIBOR, swap rate, market-standard discount rate, CDS protection, index reference entity, volatility, jump-to-default risk, single-name CDS, risk factor multiplier, high yield credit swaps, investment-grade credit swaps, credit spreads, credit ratings, investment grade, non-investment grade, margin methodologies, bank capital standards, Chicago mercantile exchange, CME, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc., FINRA, multiplier, spread bank designation, swap underlier, swaptions, options on a swap, physically settled swaptions, cash settled swaptions, option expiration date, Form PF, delta weighting, Financial Stability Oversight Council, large private fund, smaller private fund, Form PQR, MSP definitions, Proposed Form PF section 1b, question 11, question 27, proposed form PF section 2(a), question 38, proposed form PF section 3, question 47, proposed form PF section 4, question 68, proposed Form PQR, schedule B, question 5, substantial counterparty exposure, MSP test, substantial position, undiversified market participant, counterparty exposure, systemically important financial institution, commercial hedging, index derivatives, commercial loans, mitigating commercial risk, threshold levels, dealers, uncollateralized exposure, potential systemic risk impact, inflation, upward adjustment, U.S. banking system, highly leveraged, liabilities to equity, asset mix, liquidity, liquidity rights, capital markets, secured debt, unsecured debt, short-term leverage, overnight borrowing, short-term financing, highly liquid assets, US Treasuries, longer-term leverage, term borrowings, risk factor multipliers, high-grade corporate securities, FSOC, hedge funds, eligible contract participant, ECP, non-ECP, financial counterparty, traditional commodity pool, Retail Forex Pool, SD obligations, retail cash, currency based institutions, limited purpose designations, minimum duration of status, quarters, deregistration period, reevaluation period, abnormal price movement, applicable MSP thresholds, master-feeder fund, feeder fund, trading entity, MSP determination, Senator Hagan, Senator Lincoln, creditworthiness, know your counterparty requirements, daily mark requirements, trade verification, acknowledgment requirements, fund domicile, manager domicile, reference entity domicile, market location, underlying instrument, counterparty domicile, US entities, non-US entities, non-US domiciled fund, non-US securities, non-U.S. market, offshore fund, non-U.S. regulators.,
  • Page
  • 1