Skip to main content
European Banking Authority logo
  • Extranet
  • Log in
  • About us
    Back

    About us

    The EBA is an independent EU Authority.  We play a key role in safeguarding the integrity and robustness of the EU banking sector to support financial stability in the EU.

    Learn more
      • Mission, values and tasks
      • Organisation and governance
        • Governance structure and decision making
        • EBA within the EU institutional framework
        • Internal organisation
        • Accountability
      • Legal and policy framework
        • EBA regulation and institutional framework
        • Compliance with EBA regulatory products
      • Sustainable EBA
      • Diversity and inclusion
      • Careers
        • Vacancies
        • Meet our team
      • Budget
      • Procurement
    Close menu panel
  • Activities
    Back

    Activities

    To contribute to the stability and effectiveness of the European financial system, the EBA develops harmonised rules for financial institutions, promotes convergence of supervisory practices, monitors, and advises on the impact of financial innovation and the transition to sustainable finance.

    Start here
      • Single Rulebook
      • Implementing Basel III in Europe
      • Supervisory convergence
        • Supervisory convergence
        • Supervisory disclosure
        • Peer Reviews
        • Mediation
        • Breach of Union Law
        • Colleges
        • Training
      • Direct supervision and oversight
        • Markets in Crypto-assets
        • Digital operational resilience Act
      • Information for consumers
        • National competent authorities for consumer protection
        • How to complain
        • Personal finance at the EU level
        • Warnings
        • Financial education
        • National registers and national authorities responsible for handling complaints related to credit servicers
        • Frauds and scams
      • Research Workshops
      • Ad hoc activities
        • Our response to Covid-19
        • Brexit
    Close menu panel
  • Risk and data analysis
    Back

    Risk and data analysis

    To ensure the orderly functioning and stability of the financial system in the European Union, we monitor and analyse risks and vulnerabilities relevant for the regulation of banks and investment firms. We also facilitate information sharing among authorities and institutions through supervisory reporting and data disclosure.

    Learn more
      • Risk analysis
        • 2024 EU wide transparency exercise
        • EU-wide stress testing
        • Risk monitoring
        • Thematic analysis
      • Remuneration and diversity analysis
      • Reporting frameworks
        • Reporting Time Traveller
        • DPM data dictionary
      • Data
        • Registers and other list of institutions
        • Guides on data
        • Aggregate statistical data
        • Secondary reporting: data from Competent Authorities to the EBA
        • Data analytics tools
    Close menu panel
  • Publications and media
    Back

    Publications and media

    Communicating to all our audiences in the most effective way and using the most appropriate channels is crucial for us. Through our publications, announcements, and participation in external events, we are committed to reaching out to all our stakeholders to report about our policies, activities, and initiatives.

    Learn more
      • Publications
        • Guidelines
        • Regulatory Technical Standards
        • Implementing Technical Standards
        • Reports
        • Consultation papers
        • Opinions
        • Decisions
        • Staff papers
        • Annual reports
      • Press releases
      • Speeches
      • Interviews
      • Events
      • Media centre
        • Media gallery
        • Media resources
    Close menu panel

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Single Rulebook Q&A
  3. 2015_2115 Mark-to-Market Method: Application of perfectly matching provisions to FX forwards
Question ID
2015_2115
Legal act
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
Topic
Market risk
Article
298
Paragraph
2
COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs/Recommendations
Not applicable
Article/Paragraph
CRR Art 298(2)
Type of submitter
Credit institution
Subject matter
Mark-to-Market Method: Application of perfectly matching provisions to FX forwards
Question

Can the perfectly matching rule be applied to the below two FX forwards (assuming the same maturity date and same counterparty) that are perfectly matching with respect to the EUR leg:
FX forward 1: Bank pays USD 150 in return for EUR 100
FX forward 2: Bank pays EUR 100 in return for JPY 1320

such that the Mark-to-Market method is based on a single FX forward where the bank pays USD 150 in return for JPY 1320?

 

Background on the question

In Article 298 (2), the CRR allows to treat perfectly matching contracts included in a netting agreement as if they would be a single contract with a notional principal equivalent to the net receipts. Perfectly matching contracts are defined as ‘forward foreign-exchange contracts or similar contracts in which a notional principal is equivalent to cash flows if the cash flows fall due on the same value date and fully in the same currency without specifying that it needs to be the same currency pair.

A straightforward application of the above rule are e.g. the following three FX forward contracts with the same maturity (portfolio 1):
FX forward 1: Bank pays USD 150 in return for EUR 100
FX forward 2: Bank pays EUR 100 in return for JPY 1320
FX forward 3: Bank pays JPY 1320 in return for USD 150
The above three contracts fulfil all three regulatory criteria, i.e.
- a notional principal is equivalent to cash flows, and
- the cash flows fall due on the same value date, and
- the cash flows fall due in the same currencies.

Applying the perfectly matching provisions to the above trades results in a net receipt of zero and hence the applicable add-on is zero. Note that is result is economically adequate as the FX risk of the three FX forwards completely cancels out.

Our question is if the perfectly matching principle illustrated via the three trades above can also be generalized to the example of the following two FX forwards with the same maturity (portfolio 2):
FX forward 1: Bank pays USD 150 in return for EUR 100
FX forward 2: Bank pays EUR 100 in return for JPY 1320

The above two contracts are perfectly matching with respect to the EUR leg that completely cancels out. Hence an application of the perfectly matching rule with respect of the EUR leg results in an FX forward where the bank pays USD 100 and receives JPY 1320.

Note that this result is economically sensible and directly follows from the first example if the following portfolio 3 is considered:
FX forward 1: Bank pays USD 150 in return for EUR 100
FX forward 2: Bank pays EUR 100 in return for JPY 1320
FX forward 3: Bank pays JPY 1320 in return for USD 150
FX forward 4: Bank pays USD 150 in return for JPY 1320

Portfolio 3 is identical to portfolio 2 above as trades 3 and 4 cancel out. Applying the perfectly matching provisions as per portfolio 1 demonstrates that FX forwards 1, 2 and 3 are perfectly matching and result in an add-on of zero. Hence the add-on is determined based on FX forward 4 only. This demonstrates that applying the perfectly matching provisions as proposed for portfolio 2 is a straightforward generalization of the perfectly matching principle as illustrated by portfolio 1. Note further that if the application of the perfectly matching provision as per portfolio 2 would not be allowed, then the Mark-to-Market method would assign different add-ons to portfolio that are economically equivalent (portfolio 3 vs. portfolio 2) and that this would create an incentive for banks to enter into trades (i.e. trades 3 and 4 in portfolio 3) for no other reason than to reduce the add-on as per the Mark-to-Market method.

Note that applying the perfectly matching provisions as per portfolio 2 is also economically sensible and is aligned to both risk management and settlement practice. The market risk manages and settles FX forwards and FX swaps on a currency and cash-flow basis, not a currency pair basis. For example the widely used settlement system CLS collapses portfolio 2 above in a USD 150 payable and a JPY 1320 receivable, i.e. acknowledges that the two trades are perfectly matching with respect to the EUR leg.

Submission date
07/07/2015
Final answer

For the purposes of Article 298(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, perfectly matching FX contracts should have both legs referenced to the same currencies. In the example given, matching would not be possible. This approach is consistent with Q&A 798.

Status
Archive
Answer prepared by
Answer prepared by the EBA.
Note to Q&A

Update 16.09.2021: This Q&A has been archived in light of the change(s) in Article 298 to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), applicable from 28.06.2021.

Footer

EUROPEAN BANKING AUTHORITY

Our mission is to contribute to the stability and effectiveness of the European financial system through simple, consistent, transparent, fair regulation and supervision that benefits all EU citizens.


UE logoAn agency of the EU

EU Agencies Network logoEU Agencies Network

EMAS logoSustainable EBA

Contact us

  • Contacts
  • Ask a general question
  • Send a press query
  • Ask a regulatory question
  • File a complaint
  • Whistleblower reports

Stay up to date with our work

  • Subscribe to our email alerts
  • News & press RSS feed

Follow us on Social media

  • Bluesky
  • LinkedIn
  • X
  • YouTube

Find out about us

  • The EBA at a glance
  • Vacancies
  • Privacy policy
  • Legal notice
  • Cookies policy
  • Frauds and scams

Explore related sites

  • EIOPA
  • ESMA
  • ESRB
  • CEBS archive