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: MiFID II: Data for transparency

Markets in Financial Instruments II (MiFID II) makes sweeping changes to pre- and post-trade transparency, extending MiFID requirements limited to equities trades on regulated platforms to cover equity-like and non-equity instruments traded on any trading venue. It also requires trade data to be published through approved arrangements and made available on a consolidated tape. Achieving...

BLOG

13 Leading AI-Based Data Management Capability Providers

Institutions are facing huge operational burdens as they ingest huge volumes of data, demand real-time analytics and face stringent regulatory scrutiny. Consequently, the new data landscape is rendering traditional data management systems inadequate for the growing number of use cases to which data is being deployed. This has necessitated a shift towards modern data management...

EVENT

Buy AND Build: The Future of Capital Markets Technology

Buy AND Build: The Future of Capital Markets Technology London examines the latest changes and innovations in trading technology and explores how technology is being deployed to create an edge in sell side and buy side capital markets financial institutions.

GUIDE

Dealing with Reality – How to Ensure Data Quality in the Changing Entity Identifier Landscape

“The Global LEI will be a marathon, not a sprint” is a phrase heard more than once during our series of Hot Topic webinars that’s charted the emergence of a standard identifier for entity data. Doubtless, it will be heard again. But if we’re not exactly sprinting, we are moving pretty swiftly. Every time I...