Confirmations and definitions

This overview is a guide to the Banking & Finance content within the Confirmations and definitions subtopic, with links to relevant materials.

The confirmation is the document in a derivative transaction which sets out the commercial terms of a particular transaction.

Confirmations typically incorporate certain defined terms by reference to booklets published by International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) which are known as the ISDA definitions. Various ISDA definitions booklets have been published and are to be selected for incorporation into a confirmation depending on the type of derivative transaction involved.

How do confirmations and ISDA definitions fit into the ISDA documentation framework?

The vast majority of derivative transactions are documented by the standard documentation developed and published by ISDA.

The ISDA documentation framework involves layers of documentation, known as the ISDA documentation architecture:

  1. the master agreement is a pre-printed umbrella document which includes the boilerplate provisions for every trade (unless varied by the schedule to the master agreement)

  2. the schedule to the master agreement amends and supplements the terms of the master agreement as required by the parties

  3. the credit support documents (if applicable)

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Banking & Finance News

ISDA and FIA respond to CPMI-IOSCO consultation on FMI general business losses

The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) and Futures Industry Association (FIA) have submitted a joint response to the Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) consultation on the management of general business risks and general business losses by financial market infrastructures (FMIs). The associations supported the principle that infrastructures should maintain sufficient resources to absorb losses for which they are solely responsible, as these losses arise from risks within their control and should not be allocated to participants. They welcomed a more prescriptive approach, noting that previous international assessments identified significant inconsistencies and gaps in existing practices. ISDA and FIA called for clearer and more consistent standards for identifying loss scenarios, determining the size of liquid net assets funded by equity, and setting expectations for transparency, governance and stakeholder engagement. They recommended increasing the minimum equity-funded resource requirement beyond six months of operating expenses, adopting common scenario standards across infrastructures, improving disclosure of risk management assumptions and available resources, and conducting post-guidance assessments to support global convergence. The associations also reiterated their opposition to the use of variation margin gains haircutting to cover general business losses, citing its misalignment with the nature of such losses and its potential to undermine market stability.

View Banking & Finance by content type :

Popular documents