39) Over the Past Three Months, How Has the Volume of Mark and Collateral Disputes with Clients of Each of the Following Types Changed?| D. Mutual Funds, Etfs, Pension Plans, and Endowments. | Answer Type: Decreased Somewhat
ALLQ39DDSNR • Economic Data from Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED)
Latest Value
2.00
Year-over-Year Change
N/A%
Date Range
10/1/2011 - 1/1/2025
Summary
Measures changes in mark and collateral disputes with mutual funds, ETFs, pension plans, and endowments. Provides insights into institutional investment conflicts.
Analysis & Context
This economic indicator provides valuable insights into current market conditions and economic trends. The data is updated regularly by the Federal Reserve and represents one of the most reliable sources for economic analysis.
Understanding this metric helps economists, policymakers, and investors make informed decisions about economic conditions and future trends. The interactive chart above allows you to explore historical patterns and identify key trends over time.
About This Dataset
This indicator tracks dispute volume among institutional investment entities. It reflects potential tensions in financial transactions.
Methodology
Surveyed from financial institutions reporting dispute frequency.
Historical Context
Used by regulators and investment professionals to assess market interactions.
Key Facts
- Tracks institutional investment dispute volumes
- Reflects potential market friction
- Important for understanding financial interactions
FAQs
Q: What types of disputes are measured?
A: Mark and collateral disputes involving mutual funds, ETFs, pension plans, and endowments.
Q: How frequently are these disputes tracked?
A: Measured quarterly to identify trends in institutional interactions.
Q: Why are these dispute measurements important?
A: They indicate potential tensions or challenges in institutional investment environments.
Q: What does a decrease in disputes suggest?
A: Could indicate improved communication or clearer transaction protocols.
Q: How might these disputes impact investors?
A: Can potentially affect investment performance and institutional relationships.
Related Trends
37) To the Extent That the Price or Nonprice Terms Applied to Nonfinancial Corporations Have Tightened or Eased over the Past Three Months (as Reflected in Your Responses to Questions 35 and 36), What Are the Most Important Reasons for the Change?| B. Possible Reasons for Easing | 3. Adoption of Less-Stringent Market Conventions (That is, Collateral Terms and Agreements, Isda Protocols). | Answer Type: 2nd Most Important
ALLQ37B32MINR
37) To the Extent That the Price or Nonprice Terms Applied to Nonfinancial Corporations Have Tightened or Eased over the Past Three Months (as Reflected in Your Responses to Questions 35 and 36), What Are the Most Important Reasons for the Change?| B. Possible Reasons for Easing | 2. Increased Willingness of Your Institution to Take on Risk. | Answer Type: 3rd Most Important
ALLQ37B23MINR
55) Over the Past Three Months, How Have Liquidity and Functioning in the High-Grade Corporate Bond Market Changed?| Answer Type: Remained Basically Unchanged
SFQ55RBUNR
56) Over the Past Three Months, How Have the Terms Under Which High-Yield Corporate Bonds Are Funded Changed?| A. Terms for Average Clients | 2. Maximum Maturity. | Answer Type: Eased Somewhat
ALLQ56A2ESNR
25) To the Extent That the Price or Nonprice Terms Applied to Insurance Companies Have Tightened or Eased over the Past Three Months (as Reflected in Your Responses to Questions 23 and 24), What Are the Most Important Reasons for the Change?| A. Possible Reasons for Tightening | 1. Deterioration in Current or Expected Financial Strength of Counterparties. | Answer Type: 3rd Most Important
ALLQ25A13MINR
62) Over the Past Three Months, How Have the Terms Under Which Agency Rmbs Are Funded Changed?| A. Terms for Average Clients | 2. Maximum Maturity. | Answer Type: Tightened Considerably
ALLQ62A2TCNR
Citation
U.S. Federal Reserve, Institutional Investment Disputes (ALLQ39DDSNR), retrieved from FRED.