FangQuant › Commodities Futures

When entering the market, futures investment faces penetrating supervision.

Fang submitted 2019-07-23 14:37:43

Recently, DCE has implemented penetrating regulatory measures. Some overseas institutional investment committees have repeatedly asked whether similar regulatory measures will soon be introduced into the crude oil futures of Shanghai Futures Exchange. Without a clear answer, the investment committees tend to postpone the implementation of China-Brent-New York WTI crude oil futures arbitrage trading strategy.

After all, the European and American futures markets have not yet adopted the policy of tracking and investigating account information, account controllers, account controllers' related accounts and related accounts’ transactions. At present, China's futures market is experimenting with the "penetrating supervision" system, which somehow makes overseas investment institutions feel inadequate to adapt, even several overseas investments ask why the futures market "runs counter to" the trading and settlement systems of Stock Connect and Bond Connect that are in line with the international market practice.

A person familiar with the relevant policies disclosed that the main purpose of introducing the penetrating supervision system into the futures trading market is to effectively curb the phenomenon that individual institutions make profits by controlling a large number of related account "manipulating" futures prices.

The original intention of penetrating supervision

In the view of many futures industry insiders, the main purpose of introducing penetrating supervision into futures market by relevant departments is to curb irregularities such as individual institutions manipulating futures prices by using a large number of linked accounts.

"With the rapid development of science and technology, many institutions and individuals can operate hundreds of related accounts at once through high-tech trading software and servers, thus manipulating futures prices for profit in the short term." The head of a futures company told reporters that this makes the traditional supervision measures to prevent market manipulation "outdated". According to the traditional supervision methods, futures companies submit information and trading status of relevant suspicious accounts (suspected futures price manipulation) to futures exchanges and financial supervision departments. On the one hand, relevant departments grasp incomplete data and information make manipulators have the opportunity to take advantage of it. On the other hand, the efficiency of relevant supervision has become lagging behind, and it is impossible to prevent futures price manipulation beforehand.

A number of futures industry insiders pointed out that this is also one of the main reasons for the relevant departments to push the landing of penetrating supervision. The so-called penetrating supervision is different from the previous futures companies' declaration of suspicious account transactions and information of controllers. Instead, the special monitoring center is responsible for centralized management of the reporting of controlled accounts and the establishment of information sharing mechanism, thereby strengthening the management system of controlled accounts. This means that the futures exchange and the financial supervision department can quickly find the real controller behind the massive related accounts, and through large data analysis and risk management, we can see whether the real controller can use the related accounts to carry out futures price manipulation, and take relevant regulatory measures in time.

"Concern" and "Expectation" of Overseas Investment Institutions

"The implementation of penetrating supervision has indeed impacted our entry into the domestic futures market." The chief representative told reporters that European and American futures markets mainly adopt nominal accounts and comprehensive trading accounts to hide the specific investment strategies of institutions to meet the needs of institutional information privacy. Nowadays, under the penetrating regulation, the trading status of their accounts (including related accounts) in China and the relationship between the actual controllers behind them will be "exposed", which will lead to the lack of privacy of trading strategies, which makes the Institutional Investment Committee have to take a cautious attitude towards participating in investment in China's futures market.

The head of a European investment agency told reporters that they found that there was a conflict between the penetrating regulatory system and the current EU Customer Privacy Protection Act, and they could not find a solution for the time being, which indirectly slowed down their investment in domestic futures.

In fact, the biggest concern of overseas institutions is whether penetrating regulation will "force" a software into their trading system, so as to "force" access to all the data of their accounts (including related accounts), the information of actual controllers and the trading status of accounts, some information they never disclose.

But in the actual operation, China's financial regulatory authorities require them to install relevant software in the trading system and declare relevant account information independently according to China's relevant penetrating regulatory requirements. There is no "forcibly joining the software to obtain all information and data of the account".

"This has also given many overseas investment institutions reassurance. At present, many overseas institutions involved in domestic futures investment have declared relevant account information." He pointed out.

The 21st Century Economic Reporter exclusively learns that 199 overseas investment institutions (or enterprises) are participating in China's futures market. Their cumulative turnover in crude oil futures, iron ore and PTA futures reaches 5.78 million lots, 7.16 million lots and 26.53 million lots, accounting for 14.38%, 2.54% and 8.64% respectively.

In the view of the above chief representative, penetrating regulation can effectively curb the problem of individual institutions manipulating futures prices through related accounts, and thus attract more banks, enterprises and private equity institutions to participate in futures investment. So, on the contrary, it will actually stimulate the investment interest of overseas investment institutions. After all, it is very difficult for institutions to make "irrational quotation" and abnormal trading situation when futures are priced by institutions. Then, overseas investment institutions feel that cross-border arbitrage, cross-variety arbitrage, hedging and other futures trading strategies have higher operational security.



当入市期货投资面临穿透式监管
近期,大连商品交易所落实穿透式监管措施,一些海外机构投资委员会反复询问上海期货交易所原油期货品种是否也会很快引入类似的监管措施,在没得到明确答案前,投资委员会倾向暂缓执行中国-布伦特-纽约WTI原油期货跨地套利交易策略。
毕竟,欧美期货市场尚未采取对账户信息、账户实控人、账户实控人关联账户,相关账户交易状况进行跟踪调查的政策,目前中国期货市场正试水的“穿透式监管”制度,多少让海外投资机构感到不够适应,甚至个别海外投资机构反问沪港通深港通债券通的交易结算制度都与国际市场操作惯例接轨,为何期货市场“背道而驰”?
一位熟悉相关政策的知情人士透露,相关部门之所以在期货交易市场引入穿透式监管制度,主要目的是有效遏制个别机构个人通过控制大量关联账户“操纵”期货价格牟利的现象。
穿透式监管落地初衷
在多位期货业内人士看来,相关部门之所以在期货市场引入穿透式监管,主要目的是遏制个别机构个人利用海量关联账户操纵期货价格等违规行为。
“随着科技迅猛发展,现在不少机构个人可以通过高技术含量的交易软件与服务器,一下子运作成百上千个关联账户进行期货买卖,从而在短期内操纵期货价格牟利。”一家期货公司负责人告诉记者,这令传统的防范市场操纵监管措施显得“落伍”——按照传统监管方式,期货公司向期货交易所与金融监管部门递交相关可疑账户(涉嫌期货价格操作)的信息与交易状况,一方面相关部门掌握的数据信息不全,令操纵者有机可乘,另一方面相关监管效率变得滞后,无法做到提前防范期货价格操纵行为。
多位期货业内人士指出,这也是促使相关部门力推穿透式监管落地的主要原因之一。所谓穿透式监管,不同于以往期货公司申报可疑账户交易状况与实控人信息等资料,而是由专门的监控中心负责实控账户报备的集中管理,并建立信息共享机制,从而强化实控账户管理制度。这意味着期交所与金融监管部门能迅速找到海量关联账户背后的实控人,通过大数据分析与风控模型预警提前洞察上述实控人是否利用关联账户开展期货价格操纵,及时采取相关监管措施。
海外投资机构的“顾虑”与“期盼”
“穿透式监管的落实,的确给我们进入境内期货市场交易造成一定的冲击。”上述首席代表告诉记者,欧美期货交易市场主要采取名义账户与综合交易账户等制度,以此隐藏机构的具体投资策略以满足机构信息私密性的需求。如今在穿透式监管规定下,他们在境内的账户(包括关联账户)交易状况,以及背后的实控人关系都将“曝光”,导致交易策略私密性缺失,令机构投资委员会不得不对参与中国期货市场投资采取慎重态度。
一家欧洲投资机构负责人则向记者直言,目前他们发现穿透式监管制度与当前欧盟采取的客户隐私保护法案存在一定的冲突,暂时找不到相应解决方案,间接拖累他们投资境内期货的步伐。
上述知情人士向记者透露,其实海外机构的最大顾虑,是穿透式监管会不会在他们交易系统里“强行”加入一个软件,从而“强行”调取他们的账户(包括关联账户)资料、实控人信息以及账户交易状况等所有数据,其中部分信息或许是他们从来不对外披露的。
但在实际操作环节,中国金融监管部门要求他们在交易系统里自行安装相关软件,按照中国相关穿透式监管要求自主申报相关账户信息资料即可,不存在“强行加入软件调取账户所有资料信息数据”的行为。
“这也让不少海外投资机构吃了定心丸,目前已有多家参与境内期货投资的海外机构申报了相关账户资料信息。”他指出。
21世纪经济报道记者独家获悉,目前参与中国期货市场投资的海外投资机构(或企业)达到199家,其在原油期货、铁矿石、PTA气候的累计成交量分别达到578万手、716万手与2653万手,占比分别达到14.38%、2.54%与8.64%。
在上述首席代表看来,若穿透式监管能有效遏制个人机构利用关联账户操纵期货价格等问题,进而吸引更多银行、企业、私募机构入市参与期货投资,反而会激发海外投资机构的投资兴趣。毕竟,期货品种由机构主导定价,就很难出现“非理性报价”与异常交易状况,反而让海外投资机构感到跨境套利、跨品种套利、套期保值等期货交易策略的操作安全性更高。
21世纪经济报道及其客户端所刊载内容的知识产权均属广东二十一世纪环球经济报社所有。未经书面授权,任何人不得以任何方式使用。详情或获取授权信息请点击此处。

Currently no Comments.