Iosco’s consultation paper says that jurisdictions "may wish to consider" trade by trade reporting and periodic aggregate information reporting, with "reasonable delays" and while preserving the anonymity of participants and withholding the volume of a trade.
Iosco also said that any such regime should be flexible, taking into account the liquidity or trading volume of a given product, whether or not it was publicly offered, the degree of standardisation, and the cost of implementing the reporting system. For instance, not all tranches of a given securitisation might be subject to the regime — only the most liquid.
The report is based on a survey of market participants and regulators and a roundtable held in May. Unsurprisingly, feedback from the buyside was largely positive, while sell-side respondents were mostly negative.
Supporters argued that implementing a system like the US’s Trace system for corporate bonds would aid price discovery in structured finance and shift the balance of power between dealers and end investors, which would in turn increase liquidity by encouraging more buyside participants.
Detractors argued that it would discourage dealers from making markets by reducing their information advantage and potentially revealing their strategy. The eclectic and illiquid nature of the structured finance market also made post-trade reporting less useful for price discovery and valuation than in more homogeneous markets, they argued.
Iosco is accepting comments on the report until November 13.