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

Lack of Single Source of Data on Pricing of Credit Derivatives Poses Problem for Clearing House Plan

Subscribe to our newsletter

Following the recent discussions about the launch of a possible central clearing house for credit derivatives later this year, a number of related concerns have been raised in the market. Not least of these is the lack of a single, reliable source for reference pricing data.

Although there are a number of derivatives pricing vendors in the market, the dilemma will be which source to choose as the most reliable and thus institutionalise it, forsaking all others. Moreover, due to the OTC nature of these instruments, it is an illiquid and opaque market at the best of times and there is little to no observable transactional pricing, reliability is difficult to determine.

Obviously a number of contenders are currently vying for the clearing house throne – CME Group, Liffe, Eurex Clearing, DTCC and Markit have all announced plans for this market – and the choice of pricing vendor could depend on who wins this first battle.

However, most of these players are likely to choose the largest pricing provider in the current market, Markit, due to various agreements already in place. Earlier this year Liffe, the international derivatives business of Euronext, and Markit expanded their relationship via a partnership agreement. The agreement enabled Liffe to receive a wider range of consensus dividend forecasts from Markit for use in its indicative options pricing model and Bclear, its trade confirmation, administration and clearing service for wholesale equity derivatives that it plans to extend to the credit derivatives market. CME Group is the only real candidate expected to buck this trend due to its ownership of pricing provider and rival to Markit, Credit Market Analysis (CMA). CMA says it is differentiated from other providers, including Markit, because its end of day pricing service is based on buy side pricing data.

CMA has been using this difference as a key reason why its pricing is more reliable. Its argument is that basing pricing on sell side figures can open it up to the risk of mismarks on credit traders’ books and dealer biases.

It also seems that CMA may be stepping into the reference entity identifier space that is currently dominated by Markit’s Reference Entity Database (RED). According to recent reports, CMA is at the planning stages with a project to launch a similar service to Markit RED in response to buy side complaints about the high cost of access to RED.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Related content

WEBINAR

Upcoming Webinar: The ROI of Data Trust: Quantifying the Business Value of Data Observability

Date: 8 July 2026 Time: 10:00am ET / 3:00pm London / 4:00pm CET Duration: 50 minutes Data is the fuel that keeps modern financial institutions’ motors running but if that data can’t be trusted then the decisions made based upon it, or the uses to which its put, will be compromised. That’s especially important for...

BLOG

Private Markets Growth Exposes Asset Servicing’s Infrastructure Gap

By Toby Glaysher, Chairman, FINBOURNE. Asset servicers face a paradox: winning business in the industry’s fastest-growing segment whilst discovering that growth erodes rather than enhances profitability. Private markets represent both strategic opportunity and operational crisis, exposing fundamental limitations in infrastructure built for a different era. When growth creates problems The expansion into private credit, infrastructure...

EVENT

TradingTech Summit New York

Our TradingTech Summit 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

AI in Capital Markets Handbook 2026

AI adoption in capital markets has moved into a more disciplined phase. The priority is now controlled deployment: where AI can be used safely, where it can deliver measurable value, and how outputs can be governed, monitored and evidenced. The 2026 edition of the AI in Capital Markets Handbook examines how AI is being applied...