About a-team Marketing Services
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry

A-Team Insight Blogs

Despite Lack of Standards, Legal Entity Data Will Become Centre of Data Operations

Subscribe to our newsletter

Although standards for legal entity data are likely to evolve over time and become more rigorous, there does not exist today a standard directory of identifiers for legal entities across global jurisdictions, said James Redfern, head of sales and marketing at CounterpartyLink. But with an average of 27% of company records held at financial institutions deemed inaccurate, firms need to figure out how to fix these problems and then continue to maintain the database in the absence of any industry standard, particularly in current conditions, he suggested.

Redfern said, “The entity is the key element in the middle; it will become the centre of data operations.” Key to managing entity data is getting the linkages right, he said, referring to both the linking of entity data, which can quickly become complex, but also linking of disparate sources to gather that information, be that the registration authorities, regulators, exchanges, or other sources. Said Redfern, “But the linkages are rendered worthless if the data it is linked to is inaccurate or not fit for purpose.”

He promoted CounterpartyLink’s Client Data Audit Report as a useful independent auditing service that could be used within business cases for senior management. But the audit can also be very useful for helping to prioritise cleansing and maintenance work, for example prioritising the higher risk entities over those with lower risk or less exposure.

Through conducting such audits for clients, Redfern said that the most common areas for data impurities were: ownership (12%), company name (8%), registered address/headquarters (7%), regulator (6%), registration (5%), and identifiers (4%).

At least one senior member of the US Federal Reserve had highlighted entity data as a key ‘broken’ factor in risk assessment, perhaps indicating a likelihood of further examination of the issue and potential regulation down the line. But as Redfern pointed out, “It is beneficiary to have standards, but business will continue without them.”

Subscribe to our newsletter

Related content

WEBINAR

Recorded Webinar: Adding value and improving efficiencies in sanctions screening

Sanctions have been headline news this year. They are growing in number, sanctions lists are changing on a daily basis, and there can be conflict between sanctions issued by different jurisdictions – the whole calling for financial institutions to optimise sanctions screening to reduce risk and avoid potentially punitive penalties of non-compliance. This webinar will...

BLOG

US ESG Pullback Opens a New Competitive Question

US resistance to sustainability disclosure at state and federal level is widening the regulatory gap for US-domiciled firms operating internationally. In March 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) voted to end its defence of federal climate-disclosure rules. In December 2025, the White House issued an executive order targeting proxy advisers accused of promoting ESG...

EVENT

RepRisk Sustainability Breakfast Roundtable London

The London sustainability breakfast is part of the global roundtable thought leadership event series hosted by RepRisk in key markets, including, New York, Toronto, London, Frankfurt, Oslo, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Hong Kong and Singapore in 2026.

GUIDE

RegTech Suppliers Guide 2020/2021

Welcome to the second edition of A-Team Group’s RegTech Suppliers Guide, an essential aid for financial institutions sourcing innovative solutions to improve their regulatory response, and a showcase for encumbent and new RegTech vendors with offerings designed to match market demand. Available free of charge and based on an industry-wide survey, the guide provides a...