Insight Track: Why SSIs are the weak link in settlement — and what's changing
- Janet Du Chenne
- 20 hours ago
- 1 min read
Why is data management more like a relay race than a solo sprint?
When a security trades, firms pass instructions to each other with the details needed to settle: the final step in the chain from issuer to investor. Think of a relay race: each runner hands the baton to the next, and it only works if every handoff is clean, right down to the finish line.
But batons get dropped. Systems don't match. Humans have to step in. Data goes missing. That's the single biggest cause of failed trades — Standing Settlement Instructions (SSIs) missing the details they need to settle. And a fail costs everyone in the chain, just like a dropped baton costs the race.
Now add T+1: less time to fix a bad instruction. Add cross-border trades: more jurisdictions, more risk, more cost.
Which is why this matters: the EU T+1 Industry Committee has just clarified how SSIs should be stored and shared — and signalled alignment with the UK Accelerated Settlement Cycle's own T+1 work. At the core: a common standard, using FMSB's taxonomies and templates for SSIs.
In this episode of the Insight Track, Janet Du Chenne asks Bill Meenaghan, CEO of SSImple, why this matters — and who it creates value for. The conversation covers:
How SSI standardisation addresses Europe's post-trade integration barriers
What changes when asset managers, brokers and custodians handle SSIs in the same format
What happens when they don't
Watch the full episode below.
Comments