What is LDV ?

Failed to load licensing components!

Please RE-INSTALL / REPAIR Module! DO NOT UNINSTALL MODULE which will cause unrecoverable data loss!

Corporate Governance Blog

Tuesday, April 16, 2024

Loan Recalls & the T+1 Countdown: Can Securities Lenders Adapt?

Time is Running out for Lenders to Prepare for T+1 and N-PX Loan Recall Wrinkles

Author: David Schwartz J.D. CPA

The T+1 settlement cycle and new proxy voting disclosure requirements present unprecedented challenges for the securities lending industry. The clock is ticking, and lenders failing to adapt swiftly risk significant operational and financial disruptions. Technology, communication, and collaboration are crucial for successful recall processes in a rapidly evolving landscape.  

 
Comments (0)
Number of views (75)
Full Article

Categories: All, Commentary, Cross-Post

Tags:

Monday, November 6, 2023

Predictive AI in Securities Finance: Step One

How to Develop an Efficient, Legally-defensible Machine Learning Infrastructure

Author: Ed Blount

On April 2nd, 2026, an effusion of data from a daily trove of U.S. regulatory filings will create resources to drive many new use cases for artificial intelligence in capital markets. A clear opportunity exists in securities finance, where practitioners have repeatedly stated that major IT investments will be needed to comply with the many new regulatory mandates. “Black box” AI platforms may seem a ready solution but can also create nightmares for client reviews and lawsuits.

Comments (0)
Number of views (1718)

Friday, October 27, 2023

Beyond Benchmarking: The Race to Predictive Analytics in Securities Finance

10C-1 public data can reveal Watch Lists, but vendor data can predict market leverage and fees

Author: Ed Blount

When, on October 13, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission released its long-awaited final 10c-1 rule on reporting and public disclosure of securities loans, the most important passage, at least to the commercial data vendors who support the securities finance community, stated that, "the final rule could render existing securities lending data services less valuable, potentially leading to less revenue for the firms currently compiling and distributing these data for a fee." But is that true? Are bonuses and careers really at risk?? As shown in the table below, there is hope for vendors because the public data release will either omit or delay several data elements that are crucial to many important vendor applications today.

 
Comments (0)
Number of views (1363)

Thursday, September 28, 2023

Untold Stories of Market Manipulation: Archegos Capital

How Securities Lenders Unraveled the $100 billion Pump and Dump Scheme

Author: Ed Blount

By Ed Blount and Dan Hammond

“In a matter of days, the companies at the center of Archegos’s trading scheme lost more than $100 billion in market capitalization,” Archegos owed billions of dollars more than it had on hand, and Archegos collapsed.” 

This blog tells the untold story of how securities lenders in March 2021 became more than simply a source of liquidity to markets. Lenders became a market posse. Lawsuits dominated the business news about the collapse of Archegos Capital,  but nothing was reported about the chain of contractions that was set in motion by securities lending agents and custodians. It was their automated ceiling on total credit extension – share inventory buffers -- that led, in a very short time, to the traders’ discovery, surveillance and opposition to Archegos’ massive fraud and manipulation.  With a dataset of more than 225 million securities loans, we evaluated how the market responded to the Archegos’ manipulations. According to the SEC charges, the "relevant period" of the manipulation covered fewer than 150 days. During that time, more than 175,000 loans were made for equities of CBS Viacom (VIAC). We have chosen that issue as an example for our study. 

Comments (0)
Number of views (1563)
Full Article

Categories: All, Commentary, Cross-Post

Tags:

Tuesday, January 18, 2022

Balancing the Risks of Loan Disclosures for Traders

Is 10c-1 Regulatory Overreach? Or a Good Starting Point?

Author: Ed Blount

“The best trader I ever knew was broken when he took over a dying friend’s book. Everyone knew the book and turned on him.” Born in 1899, Henry Goldberg was the oldest trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange when I interviewed him in 1985. He answered my questions about trading expertise during a NYSE-sanctioned survey to find possible use cases for artificial intelligence. 

Comments (0)
Number of views (2968)
Full Article

Categories: All, Commentary, Cross-Post

Tags:

RSS
12345678910Last

Corporate Outreach Milestones

MILESTONES FOR LENDER DIRECTED VOTING

May 8, 2014: Council of Institutional Investors; - CII Elects New Board, Names Jay Chaudhuri Board Chair. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-31/north-carolina-treasurer-may-cede-pension-control-5-questions.html )

February 2014:  Swiss Minder Initiative implies the value of LDV. http://www.ipe.com/switzerlands-minder-initiative-will-cripple-securities-lending-experts-warn/10000947.article.

January 2014FL SBA begins their SecLending Auction Program with eSecLending.

November 27, 2013 – CSFME staff call with Glass Lewis Chief Operating Officer. He gave his commitment for cooperation and support for LDV, and most importantly, he suggested that perhaps we should discuss with a Broadridge/State Street/Citi the scenario that permits Citi to forward an “Omnibus Ballot” of proxies to State Street, which State Street would then take and assign the proxies to their pension lenders/LDV participants, which would then be incorporated into a single ballot and sent to Broadridge. This eliminates the secondary ballot issue. While this description is oversimplified, Glass Lewis was fairly certain the parties involved could operationally create such a combined ballot. Responding to the question on cost, the Glass Lewis executive stated that the cost depends on the number of voting policies a fund has. Most funds have one policy; therefore, depending on the client, the cost would be $.75 – $2.00 per ballot.

October 21, 2013 – CSFME staff call with ISS Chief Operations Officer. He committed his cooperation and support to advance LDV’s implementation into the markets. He responded to the question about cost: “It depends on the client and the services they use. $6-7 per ballot on average.”

June 25-28, 2013 – CSFME staff attended ICGN Annual Conference in NY, NY. Spoke with executives of CalSTRS; ICGN Chair and Blackrock about LDV.  We received favorable comments and encouragement from each.

June 6, 2013: CSFME meets with Chief Investment Officer for NYC Pension Funds. While very much in favor of the LDV concept, the comments that the NYC Pension Fund Boards are for the most part followers in new initiatives and would prefer a roll-out by other funds first.

April 5, 2013: ‘SEC gives CSFME limited approval for LDV going forward’ providing brokers assign proxies only from their proprietary shares.

March 26, 2013 – CSFME and its legal team presented the case for LDV to SEC Commissioner Dan Gallagher. Present by phone and speaking on behalf of LDV were representatives of FL SBA who spoke about the difficulty of timely recall of shares on loan following release of record date and issues on agenda; and a representative from CalSTRS who spoke about their recall policy affecting income.

March 13, 2013 – CSFME meet staff of Senator Rob Portman and Congressman Steve Stivers of Ohio. These meetings were for the purpose of lining up political support, should the SEC resist the LDV concept. We also met and spoke with CII Deputy Director Amy Borrus for one hour and 15 minutes for a scheduled 30 minute meeting.  She expressed great interest in the value of LDV to long-term beneficial owners.

January 17, 2013 – CSFME conference call with CoPERA Director of Investments.  Among CoPERA’s concerns were: (1) How are agents/brokers notified re: LDV? (2) Who moves or approaches first lender to agent or agent to lender? CSFME responds  that a side letter is needed between lender, agent and broker.

November 8, 2012 – CSFME conference call with Council of Institutional Investors (CII) detailing LDV. Some in attendance were opposed to securities lending because of their desire to vote 100% of recall. This position would be irrelevant giving CalSTRS’ change to policy on proxy recall.

October 24, 2012, 2PM – CSFME presents LDV to Broadridge Institutional Investor Group. At this meeting, a representative of CalSTRS states: “We would view brokers willing to provide proxies more favorably than those who would not.” We were also informed by CalSTRS that they were looking to change their 100% recall policy. A representative of SWIB led a discussion on International Voting Issues, and apparently was chairing 3 meetings to determine the following: 1. who is voting internationally? 2. What are the issues in the international markets? 3. How do we increase and improve international processes?

October 24, 2012, 11AM – EWB/KT conference call with ICGN.  Executives stated that the argument for LDV may not be as strong in a non-record date market, and asked what would be the cost for LDV.  They further stated that they would like to see the U.S. go with LDV first and would need more information and operational detail.

October 13, 2012 email note from Elizabeth Danese Mozely to Broadridge’s Institutional Investor Working Group: “TerriJo Saarela, State of Wisconsin Investment Board, will provide commentary on their fund’s interest in international voting and an update on her participation in the Council of Institutional Investors’ working group on international voting.  Our discussion will include the differences in process for voting abroad, share blocking, attendance at the meeting via proxy or Power of Attorney (POA), best practices available through the various laws and regulations, etc.”

September 18, 2012: CSFME contacts Blackrock/ICGN Chair for a brief on LDV.

August 13, 2012 – CSFME conference call with OTPP.  Discussion of LDV was not timely in that their SecLending Program stopped lending securities through agents in mid-2006. State Street is their custodian and they were using a tri-party repo through Chase to Lehman, until the Lehman collapse. All the assets sat at Chase. It was not clear who had voting rights. At the time of this discussion in August 2012, OTPP was thinking formulating an SLA because they do not have the capacity to lend securities on their own. We have had no discussion with them since.

August 2, 2012 – CSFME contacts Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan (OTPP) regarding LDV.

March 19, 2012 – CSFME conference call with executive in charge of securities lending for Franklin Templeton

February 22, 2012ICGN sends LDV letter of support to the SEC, signed by Chairman of the ICGN Board of Governors.

September 30, 2011CalSTRS sends LDV letter of support to the SEC, signed by Director of Corporate Governance Anne Sheehan.

July 18, 2011Florida SBA sends LDV letter of support to the SEC, signed by Executive Director and Chief Investment Officer.

November 2011 – CSFME introduces Council of Institutional Investors editor to LDV.

July 5, 2011 – CSFME sends a Comment Letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding LDV.

October 2010 – CSFME releases report: Borrowed Proxy Abuse: Real or Not? This report and the SEC’s Securities Lending and Short Selling Roundtable prompted the question from beneficial owners and regulators regarding the need to recall shares on loan to vote proxies, why can’t lenders receive proxies for shares on loan when we get the dividends? From this question, the idea for Lender Directed Voting was born.

January 2010 – SEC issues rules that brokers no longer have the discretion to vote their customers’ shares held in companies without receiving voting instructions from those customers about how to vote them in an election of directors. http://www.sec.gov/investor/alerts/votingrules2010.htm. The rule, periodically, contributed to the difficulty of corporate meetings attaining a quorum.

Fall 2009/2010 – Four public pension funds join CSFME in Empty Voting studies/LDV initiative; FL SBA, CalSTRS, SWIB and CoPERA.

September 29-30, 2009 - SEC Announces Panelists for Securities Lending and Short Sale Roundtable; http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-207.htm