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: Putting data management processes in place for MiFID II

The January 2018 compliance deadline for Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II) is approaching fast, so how ready are financial institutions to meet the directive’s requirements, what data management processes should they be prioritising to ensure compliance, and what outstanding challenges do they face? Also, what do regulators expect firms to have in...

BLOG

Complex Sanctions Environment Demands Powerful Screening Monitors: SIX Report

Sanctions screening technology has never been more important for financial institutions as new geopolitical and economic threats create the riskiest trading environment in recent history. That is the key finding of a new report, that highlights the need for greater resilience among organisations to the raised threat level faced by the global financial system. In...

EVENT

TradingTech Summit New York

Our TradingTech Briefing in New York is aimed at senior-level decision makers in trading technology, electronic execution, trading architecture and offers a day packed with insight from practitioners and from innovative suppliers happy to share their experiences in dealing with the enterprise challenges facing our marketplace.

GUIDE

MiFID II handbook, third edition – How compliant are you?

Six months after Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II) went live, how compliant is your organisation? If you took a tactical approach to cross the compliance line on January 3, 2018, how are you reviewing and renewing systems to take a more strategic approach and what are the business benefits of doing so?...