The Pitfalls of Central Clearing in the Presence of Systematic Risk

Through the lens of market participants' objective to minimize counterparty risk, we provide an explanation for the reluctance to clear derivative trades in the absence of a central clearing obligation. We develop a comprehensive understanding of the benefits and potential pitfalls with respect to a single market participant's counterparty risk exposure when moving from a bilateral to a clearing architecture for derivative markets. Previous studies suggest that central clearing is beneficial for single market participants in the presence of a sufficiently large number of clearing members. We show that three elements can render central clearing harmful for a market participant's counterparty risk exposure regardless of the number of its counterparties: 1) correlation across and within derivative classes (i.e., systematic risk), 2) collateralization of derivative claims, and 3) loss sharing among clearing members. Our results have substantial implications for the design of derivatives markets, and highlight that recent central clearing reforms might not incentivize market participants to clear derivatives

The private production of safe assets

Using high-frequency, granular panel data on short-term debt securities issued in Europe, we study the existence, empirical boundaries, and fragility of private assets’ safety. We show that only securities with the shortest maturities, issued by banks (certificates of deposit, or CDs), benefit from a safety premium. The supply of such CDs responds positively to excess safety demand. During periods of stress, this relation vanishes for all issuers of private securities, even though their aggregate volumes do not collapse. Other dimensions of heterogeneity, including issuers’ balance sheets or their domicile countries’ fiscal capacity, are less relevant for private safety