Notice2024-22563
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICC Back-Testing Framework
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
October 2, 2024
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80285-80287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-22563]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-34-101196; File No. SR-ICC-2024-008]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICC Back-Testing
Framework
September 26, 2024.
I. Introduction
On July 30, 2024, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'')
\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend its
Back-Testing Framework (``BTF'').\3\ The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on August 23, 2024.\4\
The Commission did not receive comments regarding the proposed rule
change. For the reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving
the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ ICC's Back-Testing Framework summarizes its formal
statistical approach to determining whether its Value-at-Risk (VaR)
model can reliably forecast risk.
\4\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 100679 (Aug. 8, 2024),
89 FR 66154 (Aug. 14, 2024) (File No. SR-ICC-2024-008) (``Notice of
Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
A. Background
ICC is registered with the Commission as a clearing agency for the
purpose of clearing Credit Default Swap (``CDS'') contracts.\5\ In
addition to clearing CDS contracts, ICC also clears options to purchase
index CDS contracts, which are also known as ``Index Swaptions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the
meanings assigned to them in ICC's BTF or Clearing Rules, as
applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, the proposed rule change would amend ICC's BTF. The
BTF describes how ICC conducts back-testing and how ICC remediates poor
back-testing results. The proposed rule change would amend ICC's BTF to
(1) better describe how ICC treats its back-testing Index Swaption
positions that expire in-the-money and within the margin period of risk
(``MPOR''),\6\ and (2) make other updates and clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Margin-period-of-risk or `MPOR' is a maturity factor that
is applied to reflect the length of exposure period over which the
defaulted portfolio is exposed to changes in value.'' Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 100008 (Apr. 22, 2024), 89 FR 32496 (Apr.
26, 2024) (File No. SR-ICC-2024-003) (``Notice of Filing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Index Swaption Positions
ICC's proposed rule change would revise Subsection 2.4 (``Detailed
Daily-Portfolio Back-Testing Results'') of the BTF to (1) add a
description of ICC's treatment of expiring in-the-money and within-the-
MPOR Index Swaption positions, and (2) add an illustrative example in
the form of a new Table 5.
1. Subsection 2.4: Description of Expiring In-the-Money Index Swaption
Positions
The proposed rule change would revise Subsection 2.4 to explain how
ICC treats its back-testing Index Swaption positions that expire in-
the-money and within the MPOR. ICC proposes that when a particular
portfolio contains Index Swaption positions that expire within the
MPOR, ICC would replace the Mark-to-Market (``MTM'') values of the
expired option positions with the corresponding Intrinsic Values
(``IV''). In doing so, ICC would use the end-of-day (``EOD'') prices as
of the given day that ICC is back-testing.
In carrying out this process, ICC would use the following
assumptions, as noted in the revised Subsection 2.4: \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Currently, the BTF assigns a standardized P/L value of $0.00
to such positions.
i. The IV is positive for a bought option position and negative
for a sold option position that is in-the-money.
ii. The option position with positive IV results in an option
exercise on the expiration date and reflects the positive value to
the option holder buying/selling the underling index position at the
fixed strike price and selling/buying the underlying index position
at the EOD-price for a profit.
iii. The sold option position, with negative IV, results in the
assignment of an underlying index position to the seller of the
option on the expiration date.
iv. The assigned underlying index position could be bought or
sold protection depending on the type of sold option instrument.
v. The unrealized P/L for the exercised/assigned option
positions are computed against the underlying MTM value for all days
after the CDS index option's expiration date.
2. Addition of Table 5 to Subsection 2.4
The proposed rule change also would add to Subsection 2.4 a new
Table 5, entitled ``Minimum 5-Day P/L Detail for Expiring Options
Positions.'' Table 5 would provide an illustrative example of the back-
testing computation described in the BTF and the unrealized profit/loss
(``P/L'') for an in-the-money Index Swaption position that expires
within the MPOR.
[[Page 80286]]
C. Other Additions and Revisions to Table 3, Table 4, and Section 6
In addition to the changes related to Index Swaption positions, the
proposed rule change also would make updates and clarifications to
other sections of the BTF. The proposed rule change would change
references from ``P&L'' in Table 3 and Table 4 to ``P/L'' to
consistently refer to ``profit or loss'' throughout the BTF. Moreover,
the proposed rule change would update Section 6, ``Revision History,''
to reflect the revisions proposed herein. Finally, the proposed rule
change would add a new footnote 1 in Subsection 1.1. This footnote
would explain that the term ``Net Asset Value'' is also referred to and
is equivalent to ``Mark-to-Market,'' as used in the BTF.
III. Discussion and Commission Findings
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization.\8\ Under the Commission's Rules of Practice, the ``burden
to demonstrate that a proposed rule change is consistent with the
Exchange Act and the rules and regulations issued thereunder . . . is
on the self-regulatory organization [(``SRO'')] that proposed the rule
change.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
\9\ Rule 700(b)(3), Commission Rules of Practice, 17 CFR
201.700(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The description of a proposed rule change, its purpose and
operation, its effect, and a legal analysis of its consistency with
applicable requirements, must all be sufficiently detailed and specific
to support an affirmative Commission finding,\10\ and any failure of an
SRO to provide this information may result in the Commission not having
a sufficient basis to make an affirmative finding that a proposed rule
change is consistent with the Exchange Act and the applicable rules and
regulations.\11\ Moreover, ``unquestioning reliance'' on an SRO's
representations in a proposed rule change is not sufficient to justify
Commission approval of a proposed rule change.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id.
\11\ Id.
\12\ Susquehanna Int'l Group, LLP v. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 866 F.3d 442, 447 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (``Susquehanna'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After carefully considering the proposed rule change, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to ICC. For the reasons given below, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \13\ and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of ICC be designed, to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted above, the proposed rule change primarily would add to the
BTF description of how ICC back-tests Index Swaptions positions that
expire in-the-money within the MPOR. The proposed rule change also
would ensure the consistent use of the term ``P/L'' and explain the
equivalence of the terms ``Net Asset Value'' and ``Mark-to-Market.''
The enhanced description of ICC's approach to back-testing Index
Swaptions positions that expire in-the-money within the MPOR would
strengthen ICC's back-testing by making the results a more accurate
representation of potential P/L for such positions. Under the BTF as
revised, ICC would calculate P/L for such positions, using the
assumptions and process described above, rather than just assuming zero
value for all as per the current practice.
Consistent use of the term ``P/L'' and establishing the equivalence
of the terms ``Net Asset Value'' and ``Mark-to-Market'' would also
strengthen ICC's back-testing. The changes would help ensure the
consistent and clear operation of the BTF by eliminating any potential
confusion among the use of these terms. This should, in turn, help
support the accuracy and reliability of ICC's back-testing.
Thus, the proposed rule change would help ensure that ICC continues
to reliably forecast risk and that its back-testing accurately verifies
that the number of actual, observed losses is consistent with the
number of projected losses. Because ICC uses back-testing to forecast
and manage the risk associated with clearing Index Swaption
transactions, these improvements to the BTF should help ICC avoid
losses that could result from the mismanagement of such risk. Because
such losses could disrupt ICC's ability to operate and thus clear and
settle transactions, the Commission finds the proposed rule change
would promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities and derivative transactions.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A) of the Act
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A) requires ICC to establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to cover its credit exposures to its participants by
establishing a risk-based margin system that, at a minimum is monitored
by management on an ongoing basis and is regularly reviewed, tested,
and verified by conducting backtests of its margin model at least once
each day using standard predetermined parameters and assumptions.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed changes described above will enhance ICC's risk-based
margin system by enhancing ICC's ability to calculate P/L more
precisely for back-testing by factoring in accurate P/L values of ITM
Index Swaption positions. This enhancement, along with the other
changes detailed herein, will ensure that the predetermined parameters
and assumptions (here, the BTF) that ICC management relies upon to
regularly review, test, and verify its margin requirements are more
accurate than the previous iteration of ICC's risk-based margin system.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A).\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and with the
requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \19\ and Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(6)(vi)(A).\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\20\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(6)(vi)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\21\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ICC-2024-008), be, and hereby
is, approved.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\22\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
[[Page 80287]]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-22563 Filed 10-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on October 2, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.