Since the financial crisis, the euro area’s institutional architecture has evolved significantly…
https://www.ecb.europa.eu//press/key/date/2019/html/ecb.sp190704_1~c105b24fd6.en.html
Since the financial crisis, the euro area’s institutional architecture has evolved significantly…
https://www.ecb.europa.eu//press/key/date/2019/html/ecb.sp190704_1~c105b24fd6.en.html
They propose a simple framework to explain low global real risk-free interest rates…
Today’s updates include DVC data and calculations for the period 1 June 2018 to 31 May 2019 …
The deputy governor of the Bank of Japan, Masayoshi Amamiya, has warned that the creation of crypto by central banks…
L’iniziativa di Finriskalert.it “Il termometro dei mercati finanziari” vuole presentare un indicatore settimanale sul grado di turbolenza/tensione dei mercati finanziari, con particolare attenzione all’Italia.
Significato degli indicatori
I colori sono assegnati in un’ottica VaR: se il valore riportato è superiore (inferiore) al quantile al 15%, il colore utilizzato è l’arancione. Se il valore riportato è superiore (inferiore) al quantile al 5% il colore utilizzato è il rosso. La banda (verso l’alto o verso il basso) viene selezionata, a seconda dell’indicatore, nella direzione dell’instabilità del mercato. I quantili vengono ricostruiti prendendo la serie storica di un anno di osservazioni: ad esempio, un valore in una casella rossa significa che appartiene al 5% dei valori meno positivi riscontrati nell’ultimo anno. Per le prime tre voci della sezione “Politica Monetaria”, le bande per definire il colore sono simmetriche (valori in positivo e in negativo). I dati riportati provengono dal database Thomson Reuters. Infine, la tendenza mostra la dinamica in atto e viene rappresentata dalle frecce: ↑,↓, ↔ indicano rispettivamente miglioramento, peggioramento, stabilità rispetto alla rilevazione precedente.
Disclaimer: Le informazioni contenute in questa pagina sono esclusivamente a scopo informativo e per uso personale. Le informazioni possono essere modificate da finriskalert.it in qualsiasi momento e senza preavviso. Finriskalert.it non può fornire alcuna garanzia in merito all’affidabilità, completezza, esattezza ed attualità dei dati riportati e, pertanto, non assume alcuna responsabilità per qualsiasi danno legato all’uso, proprio o improprio delle informazioni contenute in questa pagina. I contenuti presenti in questa pagina non devono in alcun modo essere intesi come consigli finanziari, economici, giuridici, fiscali o di altra natura e nessuna decisione d’investimento o qualsiasi altra decisione deve essere presa unicamente sulla base di questi dati.
Last 13.06.2019 EIOPA (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) and ECB (European Central Bank) published the Common Minimum Standards for Data Revisions agreed between themselves, the NSAs (National Supervisory Authorities) and the NCBs (National Central Banks).
Because of the integrated reported approach, Data Quality (DQ) is crucial in any data management process: data reported by the insurance undertakings are used by both NSAs in the review process, whose outcome is then submitted to EIOPA, and by most NCBs to fill in the insurance corporation statistics, delivered to the ECB. This leads to a need of a common understanding of the minimum level of DQ required.
By agreeing on common minimum standards, all authorities have aligned their expectations for the minimum acceptable level of DQ for the purposes of the different uses of data. The common minimum standards specify:
[1] The common minimum standards should not prevent stricter practices from being applied at national level: the NSAs/NCBs still have the responsibility and the power to request that financial institutions revise data when necessary. As the XBRL validations cannot cover all DQ issues, it may happen that, after deeper controls carried out by the insurance undertakings themselves, data may be occasionally submitted a second time. Resubmissions are divided into (a) “revisions” (if data points have changed) and (b) “duplications” (if there are no changes in the data points, but duplications have been fixed).
[2] The synchronisation states that the same data have to be available at all levels (i.e. financial institutions, NSAs/NCBs, EIOPA, ECB) at all times: it is important to keep consistency between EIOPA’s Central Repository, the ECB’s statistical databases and NSA/NCB databases. Any revision of data should be carried out at all levels of the transmission chain so that all parties involved have the same data. Data should not be unilaterally modified at the NCB or NCA level, unless in exceptional cases (identification of wrong data and impossibility to fix them by the financial institution due to time restrictions).
[3] NSAs and NCBs shall send the revisions respectively to EIOPA and the ECB in a timely manner, reducing time pressure for business users who need high-quality and stable data on specific dates. Specifically:
[4] NSAs and NCBs shall send a note explaining what trigger the revision of aggregated data in case of all non-routine revisions and significant routine revisions. In case of DQ issues reported by individual entities, the NSAs shall either use the erroneous flag available in the XML metadata file of the EIOPA Central Repository Specification or email EIOPA to informing of the need for revision.
[5] Back data should be revised at least as far back as technically possible, given the operational limitations of the data collection infrastructure, where an issue is identified and supposed to lead to significant revisions, which could also affect the past. Ә%
Luigi Federico Signorini, Vice Direttore Generale della Banca d’Italia, interviene alla conferenza “Oltre Basilea”…
https://www.bancaditalia.it/pubblicazioni/interventi-direttorio/int-dir-2019/signorini-25062019.pdf
The publication Leverage ratio treatment of client cleared derivatives sets out a targeted revision to align the leverage ratio measurement…
Blockchain data startup dfuse has just closed its first official round of equity funding…