Static Data, quite simply information by which financial services firms can identify where to settle transactions, and indeed identify their counterparts.
Then why so difficult? Many claim to have ‘globalised standardised’ reference data platforms, but with around a third of transactions failing due to static differences, and indeed in the event of market default, claims remaining outstanding for years, surely
there is a gap in the process..
To clarify with whom you have traded, and indeed the destination of funds or securities is of paramount importance in both trade, and post-trade spaces.
Again, to confirm and match these aspects is a key efficiency play (also reducing resultant cost) for financial institutions, and should form a central part of the post trade matching process.
Platforms with closed user group approaches only assist those who are a ‘member of the club’, whereas those with a more open infrastructure where said data can be shared, much better for the community at large.
With Europe defining their own approach for transaction reporting under ESMA/EMIR, and the US established with CFTC/Dodd Frank, there seems to be a real risk of another split process forming around this critically important process.
Clearly, where mandated, the ability to match Identifiers is also important, especially where regulation mandates that both parties are responsible, if a global standard is not set, there is a risk of as many differences in the new process, as there was
in the ‘old’ process. The Legal Entity Identifier will help start resolving challenges in this space, but I believe a more open, collaborative approach to Static Data management would avoid closed group pitfalls and address further inefficiency in the post