| Monday 06th February 2012 |
COMPARISON BETWEEN CFS AND CFS-MKII
| CFS | CFS-MK II | ||
1 |
Risk is on the Broker |
1 |
Risk is on the NCCPL |
2 |
Authorized Financier status of each Stock Exchange was needed to Extend financing. |
2 |
Authorized Financier status would not be needed to extend finances |
3 |
Less capacity to extend money to brokers at any Stock Exchange in a neutral manner |
3 |
Greater capacity to lend money to brokers at any Stock Exchange in a neutral manner. |
4 |
Pool of funds administered by brokers |
4 |
Pool of funds administered by NCCPL |
5 |
Brokers’ personal commitment is present |
5 |
Brokers' personal commitment is missing because the risks will be essentially on CFS eligible shares held by Authorized Financiers in its own name |
6 |
Authorized Financiers take flat margins from financee irrespective of the level of risk |
6 |
There are no flat margins/ collaterals. Collaterals are based on VAR methodology. i.e. higher margins where the risks are higher |
7 |
|
7 |
Special Margins are collected on a daily basis by the NCCPL without any hassle to financial institutions |