Page tree

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.



1) Use Case reminder


6) For next week.


Discussed whether warrants and straight forward options on equities belong with equities (which are under the SEC), whereas CFTC is concerned with equities involved in swaps.  Agreed to manage them under derivatives together with options, but to add an explanatory note on the equity instruments ontology saying that for anyone looking for rights and warrants, that they are in derivatives.

Also discussed the fact that many equity options and warrants are regulated by the SEC, whereas equity swaps are managed by the CFTC.  There is a lot of synergy there, and our work could benefit from adding an SME from the SEC for fleshing out this part of the model.  The respective regulatory organizations could also benefit from having shared terminology that they can both use.  We looked briefly at the SEC glossary and found a definition for Option, which we should add to our model, but not for Entitlement or Warrant.  John will reach out to a colleague at the SEC and see if they would be willing to consider joining our working group.

We also started to review the spreadsheet that John provided for equities, which can be found here.  

View file
  Many of the top-level concepts are the same as they are for other swaps, but there are some additions needed.   Under 'exchange', we have SEF and DCO, for example, but not 'off-facility' which we need to add.  For instrument identifiers, we have RIC, FIGI (which they call Bloomberg), SEDOL, etc. but are missing Valoren, which should be added.

For next week, John will provide a couple more acronym expansions, and we will start at line 42 in the spreadsheet for review purposes.


Action items