Liquidity Overcommitment Risks
Definition
CPs legally settle all novated trades regardless of client receipt, requiring high capital buffers. Manual processes exacerbate poor visibility into net exposures.
Key Findings
- Financial Impact: AUD millions in excess capital/liquidity requirements per CP; potential to revolutionise with real-time reducing costs by 50-80%
- Frequency: Ongoing for T+2 cycle per trade
- Root Cause: Batch settlement and bilateral confirmation delays pre-novation
Why This Matters
The Pitch: Third-party clearing in Australia 🇦🇺 incurs significant capital costs from novation exposures. Real-time clearing automation removes T+2 liquidity drag.
Affected Stakeholders
Clearing Participants, Risk Managers, Treasury
Deep Analysis (Premium)
Financial Impact
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Current Workarounds
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Get Solutions for This Problem
Full report with actionable solutions
- Solutions for this specific pain
- Solutions for all 15 industry pains
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
Methodology & Sources
Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.
Related Business Risks
Novation Processing Bottlenecks
Novation Failure Penalties
Trading Suspension Opportunity Costs
Compliance Monitoring Overhead
Monitoring Process Delays
Delisting Risk Fines
Request Deep Analysis
🇦🇺 Be first to access this market's intelligence