Free Site Registration

Transition from IBOR to Alternative Reference Rates - Implications and Roadmap

Traders Magazine Online News, August 20, 2018

Parminder Bansil and Vivek Agarwal

Virtually every bank that participated in the recent ISDA IBOR Global Benchmark Transition survey, expressed concern about their organizationís level of exposure to IBORs. Itís easy to see why. Contracts referencing IBORs have hundreds of trillions of dollars in notional of derivatives in addition to trillions of dollars in other contracts. These contracts cover a wide range of financial products, including OTC and exchange-traded derivatives, loans and deposits, bonds, repos, commercial papers and securitized products. The transition from IBOR to ARRs will impact almost all participants in financial services including investment banks, asset managers, commercial banks, exchanges, custodians, central clearing counterparties (CCPs), Reference data vendors to name a few.

Use of IBORs has been on the decline for a number of reasons. Firstly, the level of interbank borrowing itself has reduced drastically. Based on the FRED website, interbank borrowings declined from a peak of almost half a trillion dollars in 2008 to around seventy million by the end of 2017. Secondly, banks prefer to use market observable rates such as those from overnight interest rate swaps. This eliminates any subjectivity inherent in a survey based rate. Thirdly, alternative reference rates (ARRs) are readily available, such as SOFR, SONIA, TONAR and SARON in the US, UK, Japan, and Switzerland respectively. Lastly, UKís Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced that it will no longer require panel banks to provide survey inputs for Libor calculation after 2021. For these reasons, the sustainability of IBORs is highly suspect.


Non-availability of IBORs and transition to ARRs will have serious implications for financial institutions. These implications span valuation and risk management, contract terms, and asset class and currency specific processes. Implications will be further compounded due to the timing of this transition:

Valuation models and risk management approach may need to be reviewed and updated given the fact that the calculation of ARRs is very different from how IBORs are arrived at. Additionally, while IBORs are unsecured, most ARRs are collateralized. These differences change the risk profile. While ARRs are typically lower than corresponding IBORs, they could have different levels of volatility and impact the economics of the trade referencing IBOR and moving to ARR.

Many contracts have fall-back provisions pre-empting the possibility of short-term unavailability of IBORs to ride over the brief period of unavailability of IBORs with limited losses or gains. However, unavailability of IBOR for the remaining life of the contract is unlikely to be addressed in a fall back clause and can leave firms with a significant exposure.

The complexity of transition from IBOR to ARR will depend upon the asset class and currency in question. Derivatives contracts in the US may be ahead of the curve given groundwork being done by ISDA on standardizing contracts and Fed for providing a robust and transparent ARR. Something like a highly customized syndicated loans contract executed in Euro may take a little longer to transition.

There is uncertainty around when the transition to ARR will actually take place. Further, the transition is not likely to be coordinated across different currencies. This will mean that financial institutions will need to support IBOR and ARRs in parallel for a substantial period. Contracts referring to more than one currencies may also need to be broken up by currencies due to this issue.

The recommended approach to migration

For more information on related topics, visit the following channels:

Comments (0)

Add Your Comments:

You must be registered to post a comment.

Not Registered? Click here to register.

Already registered? Log in here.

Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.