Thursday, May 30, 2013

Data management implications of solvency II on Asset Managers

As Europe's largest financial services institutions, a growing number of new or revised regulations as Basel III, UCITS IV, MiFID II and solvency II, they are a problem. You can create a separate data management infrastructure for different rules or they can come up with a solution that requires some adjustment to implement provide coverage of each of the new scheme. Buying separate system for each can be expensive - a convergent solution is the way to go
organized to ensure better risk management in the insurance industry, II of solvency must tend to the needs of the significant impact on insurers, asset managers and third-party data manager. Solvency II, which entered into force in early 2013, reporting on tremendous responsibility grateful asset managers unprecedented transparency and disclosure to clients and investors Keep
justify; "> solvency II will require that reports of asset managers with a greater granularity of information to produce than the usual. Needed
The level of granularity depends on the type of asset in question. Structured products, for example, is shown in one location while derivatives reporting in a closed and open forms of contract. Some industry players as far as suggesting that solvency II reporting is passed on to define new standards for managing data in the financial services industry. The fact that in the UK alone, the insurance company responsible for nearly one-quarter of all assets under management means that the overall impact of solvency II on the asset manager is not hard to imagine.
make the short to medium term, II data solvency required considerable challenge for asset managers. As insurance companies are preparing for the new regulatory framework is shown that the calculation of the SCR (Capital of solvency required) provides a collection of data from a variety of sources to them. As such actuaries accurate and detailed data assets and quantifiable metrics, liquidity and credit risks are sharp. It affects the data complexity, quality, timeliness and general administration.
It is important to note that while solvency II requires that The data in full right and proper, it remains unclear how the regulatory authorities in different countries to define these parameters. Saying meet these parameters is undoubtedly rigorous testing data flow between drag in-house system, and between internal and external systems.
beyond solvency II less than a year, more more investment managers do not have the processes and systems required to find, collect, verify, standardize and approve the data for the new system. In the past, asset managers typically record ID security, nominal owners, money and prices of securities under its management. With the market risk component of the solvency II asset manager is to collect additional information such derivative characteristics ultimate issuer or counterparty, the revenue and ratings.
Remember beam 3 of solvency II insurers must Quarterly Reports regulators submitted no later than 20 days after the end of the quarter. This has implications for asset managers, as they have the data input for insurers also provide before that - realistic 5 working days after the end of the quarter
While the Framework Directive on solvency II standards, asset managers will take their clients with specific input on the insurer to deliver them. Press the base before the insurance company solvency II is the strength of the asset manager is also satisfied design, implement zero interface, and test interface. Liaison enables early enough time to increase the memory and system resources, if necessary, to meet the range.

Graz Sweden AB provides financial services player with the most cost-effective way to access, manage and analyze their data. Using the data management platform flexibility HINC Graz data warehouse infrastructure helps manage tens of thousands of investment portfolios for several institutions, including insurance companies 9, 120 banks and the largest fund manager in Scandinavia.