TABB Group / Alacra Issue Q3 LEI Ranking on LEI Quality Statistics

LEI Process Continues to Come Up Short

TABB and Alacra Provide New In-Depth Metrics Tracking Ongoing LEI Relevance to the
Financial Services Industry
TABB Group maintains a ranking of the 14 LEI (Legal Entity Identifier) registration authorities
(Local Operating Units LOUs) around the globe based on data consistency and uniformity.
While DTCC/SWIFT led the other 13 LEI providers in LEI completeness, with a score of 98%, TABB
Group, along with Alacra (the leading provider of legal, counterparty and reference data
solutions), believes the LEI process continues to face challenges. Only 15% of entities with a
credit rating, 14.5% of entities that are listed on global exchanges, 17% of organizations with a
SWIFT BIC code (global banks), and 51.4% of European Banking Association entities (EBAs
European Banks) have an LEI. While many are properly set up, a large percentage of LEIs have
been issued to organizations that do not engage in financial markets transactions, let alone the
complex derivatives transactions that LEIs were developed to track.
The TABB Group LEI Rankings compare LEI providers on the consistency and uniformity of their
LEI data as aggregated by P-LEI.org. Three metrics are used: validity of primary record
information, completeness of address and regional information, and the quality of supporting
metadata information.
Alacra provides a more in-depth analysis of LEIs, comparing issued LEIs against the body of
global rated, regulated and listed counterparties and entities that should have an LEI.

TABB Group
115 Broadway 12th Floor New York, NY 10006 T: 646 722-7800 F: 508 519-0519 www.tabbgroup.com
The TABB Group, Europe LTD 60 Cannon Street, Suite 413 London EC4N 6NP T: +44 (0) 203 207 9027
Alacra
100 Broadway Suite 1101 New York, NY 10005 T: 212 363-9620 F: 212 363-9630 www.alacra.com
125 Old Broad Street, 6th Floor London EC2N 1AR T: +44 (0) 20 3059 5765 F: +44 (0) 20 3192 5577

TABB Group LEI Measurement Process

TABB Group tests regional information against standard country and region codes to determine
the percentage of accurate records. LEI entries are then analyzed to determine the
completeness of field-level data entered for information such as Legal Address, Registered City,
Entity Status Code, Entity Legal Form, LEI Status Code, LEI Assignment Date, LEI Certification
Status, LEI Record Last Update Date, and LOU Mapping Profile. The higher the percentage, the
more populated fields each LEI record contains. While we are unable to validate the accuracy of
every field, our measure tracks that these important fields are being supplied.
The tables below highlight both the nominal score and ranking of the 14 LEI providers by the
three metrics.
Exhibits 1 & 2
TABB Group LEI Measures

Name
DTCC/SWIFT
Takasbank (Turkey)
Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (France)
Centrln depozit cennch papr, a.s. (Czech)
Dutch Chamber of Commerce
Registro Mercantil del Reino de Espaa
Unione Italiana per le Camere di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura
London Stock Exchange
WM Datenservice
Bundesanzeiger Verlag GmbH
National Settlement Depository (Russia)
Krajowy Depozyt Papierw Wartociowych S.A. (Poland)
National Board for Patents and Registration (PRH) (Finland)
Irish Stock Exchange
Name
DTCC/SWIFT
Takasbank (Turkey)
Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (France)
Centrln depozit cennch papr, a.s. (Czech)
Dutch Chamber of Commerce
Registro Mercantil del Reino de Espaa
Unione Italiana per le Camere di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura
London Stock Exchange
WM Datenservice
Bundesanzeiger Verlag GmbH
National Settlement Depository (Russia)
Krajowy Depozyt Papierw Wartociowych S.A. (Poland)
National Board for Patents and Registration (PRH) (Finland)
Irish Stock Exchange

Address / Region
Comprehensiveness
93%
67%
65%
55%
75%
74%
33%
80%
75%
73%
67%
67%
56%
75%

Source: TABB Group, P-LEI Data downloaded on Oct. 22, 2014

TABB Group / Alacra

2

Rank
1
10
11
13
3
6
14
2
5
7
9
8
12
4

Total
Comprehensiveness
98%
93%
91%
89%
87%
87%
87%
83%
81%
81%
73%
73%
71%
69%

USA Specific
Validity
100%
N/A
100%
100%
100%
100%
N/A
98%
99%
100%
N/A
N/A
N/A
99%

Rank
2
3
4
1
5
9
7
6

Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Field-level
Comprehensiveness
99.3%
100.0%
99.8%
100.0%
85.7%
85.7%
99.7%
71.4%
71.3%
71.4%
57.1%
57.1%
57.1%
57.1%

Rank
5
1
3
1
6
7
4
8
10
9
11
14
11
11

Going Beyond Consistency

Having a consistent and uniform database is only part of the picture in implementing an
effective LEI system. Ensuring the appropriate entities are covered is as, if not more, important.
Although the LEI universe is growing, the universe of relevant and covered institutions isnt. To
better gauge this, TABB has partnered with Alacra to track important LEI adoption statistics.
Alacras process for assessing and tracking ongoing LEI relevance to the financial services
industry, enables us to have greater insight into whether the LEIs that are being created are
relevant to institutions, regulators,
and the health of the industry.
Exhibit 3
While LEI records have increased,
the universe of listed, rated, and
regulated entities has remained
constant (see Exhibit 3). The
overlap between these two
universes tracks the number of
listed, rated, and regulated entities
that have been assigned an LEI.
This overlap is the key to assessing
the effectiveness of the LEI system.
Having entities that are likely to
execute financial risk-incurring
transactions registered with LEIs is
the reason why the LEI system was
created in the first place.
Exhibit 4 (right) introduces the
TABB/Alacra Effectiveness Index,
which portrays the overlap as a
proportion of the LEI Universe. The
index has decreased from 8.9 in
March to 8.0 in November. This
means that the number of nonrelevant LEIs is growing faster than
the number of useful LEIs. When
the LEI database is being filled with
financially non-relevant entities
faster than financially significant
entities, the overall quality and
usefulness of the LEI regime is
degraded.

LEI Universe & Universe of Listed, Rated, Regulated

Entities
350,000
LEI CGR: +6.02%
300,000

250,000
200,000
Listed,
Rated &
Regulated
CGR:
+0.01%

150,000
100,000

Overlap
CGR:
+4.5%

50,000
0
March

April

Listed, Rated, Regulated Universe

May
Total LEI Universe

November
Overlap

CGR = Compound Growth Rate

Source: Alacra, TABB Group

Exhibit 4
Percentage of LEI Universe Overlapping with Universe of
Listed, Rated, Regulated Entities
9.20
9.00
8.80
8.60

8.40
8.20
8.00
7.80
7.60

7.40
March

April

May

TABB/Alacra Effectiveness Index

Source: Alacra, TABB Group

TABB Group / Alacra

3

November

Segmenting the LEI entities with a

credit rating, or those likely to
raise debt or borrow money from
financial institutions, we can
observe a slight uptick from May
to November in LEIs. But the
quarterly increase was only 1.6%.
The vast majority, 85%, of rated
entitles still have yet to register or
be registered (see Exhibit 5).
The LEI entities listed on a national
stock exchange grew at a faster
rate in terms of LEI registration
from May to November; but
overall, the same conclusion can
be drawn about the vast majority
of yet-to-be-registered entities, as
only 14.5% of listed entities have
an LEI (see Exhibit 6).

Exhibit 5
Rated Entities with and without LEI
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%

86.6%

85%

13.4%

15.0%

50.0%

40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
May

November

% of Rated Entities with a LEI

% of Rated Entities without a LEI

Source: Alacra

Exhibit 6
Listed Entities with and without LEI
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%

While rated and listed entities or

entities that are likely to be a bank
counterparty are very low in LEI
registration rates, it would be
expected that regulated banks
would have a much higher
registration level. While BICs have
a higher registration than
corporate entities, and have
shown significant growth over the
past quarter (almost a 600%
increase), BICs LEI growth rate is
still only 17%, which is very poor
given the G20 mandate for greater
transparency and the CFTCs LEI
requirements (see Exhibit 7).

60.0%

91.0%

90.3%

89.3%

85.5%

9.0%

9.7%

10.7%

14.5%

March

April

May

November

50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%

0.0%
% of Listed Entities with a LEI

% of Listed Entities without a LEI

Source: Alacra

Exhibit 7
BICs with and without LEI
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%

83.0%
97.0%

50.0%

40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%

17.0%
3.0%

0.0%

May
% of BICs with a LEI

Source: Alacra

TABB Group / Alacra

4

November
% of BICs without a LEI

The European Banks are by far the

most engaged in the LEI process.
The European Banking Association
entities (EBAs) are the most
comprehensively covered universe
in terms of LEI registration (see
Exhibit 8).

Exhibit 8
EBAs with and without LEI
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%

48.6%
70.0%

61.4%

60.0%
50.0%

40.0%

Taking a closer look at GMEI, the

most populous LEI database, about
32.2% of entities indicate a legal
form of Other despite the fact
that there are more than 200 legal
forms to choose from. Lastly,
around 39,000 of the 160,000 LEIs
in this database have lapsed and
are out of date.

30.0%

51.4%
20.0%

38.6%

10.0%
0.0%
May
% of EBAs with a LEI

November
% of EBAs without a LEI

Source: Alacra

Exhibit 9
Registered Entity Types in GMEI
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%

35.5%

34.3%

32.2%

64.5%

65.7%

67.8%

May

November

70.0%
60.0%
50.0%

40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Categorized Entity Types

Entity Types that are "Other"

Source: Alacra

Note: Neither TABB Group nor Alacra have been engaged by any local, national, or global entity to create this analysis, and this
analysis is not financially sponsored by any entity outside of either TABB Group or Alacra. TABB Group is a financial markets research
and advisory firm with locations in New York, London, and Westborough, MA. Alacra develops workflow applications that enable
300,000 end users at over 200 financial institutions, professional service firms and corporations to find, organize, analyze and
present mission-critical business information. It has offices in New York and London.
TABB Group / Alacra
5