Skip to content

FRAGMOS - enrichment of CorporateAction #3237

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
JBZ-Fragmos opened this issue Nov 8, 2024 · 9 comments · May be fixed by #3637 or #3642
Open

FRAGMOS - enrichment of CorporateAction #3237

JBZ-Fragmos opened this issue Nov 8, 2024 · 9 comments · May be fixed by #3637 or #3642
Assignees

Comments

@JBZ-Fragmos
Copy link
Contributor

JBZ-Fragmos commented Nov 8, 2024

Related PR

#3366

(ex - #3220)

Background

CorporateAction type already exists in Event model - here it is as of today :
image

It may be enriched with optional complementary information, described below.

Proposal - OVERVIEW

image

Proposal - FOCUS on main new type : AdjustmentTerms

image

Compatibility

all is 100% backward-compatible

@LionelSG-REGnosys
Copy link
Contributor

Correction of underlier to be of data type Underlier is in this PR: #3271

@JBZ-Fragmos
Copy link
Contributor Author

JBZ-Fragmos commented Jan 21, 2025

as an information, the representation of the calculation details involved when resolving the appropriate endpoint values per each type of corporate action at stake (i.e. when resolving the end-value for the attributes of adjustmentFactorCalculation) is technically feasible

meaning could be added at later stage as another optional attribute for adjustmentFactorCalculation by re-using some relevant components which are part of the set coming with PR proposal below:

@llynhiavu
Copy link

Discussed at the CDM Derivatives Working Group - March 12th, 2025 #3487. This has been reviewed already by the CRWG and Derivatives WG. Changed the status to Approved.

@JBZ-Fragmos
Copy link
Contributor Author

great !
thanks @llynhiavu

@lolabeis
Copy link
Contributor

@JBZ-Fragmos Is there a PR already for this? If not, can you please link it here once submitted? Thanks

@JBZ-Fragmos
Copy link
Contributor Author

the link to last PR is already attached, actually it is at very top level of the current github page

Image

@JBZ-Fragmos
Copy link
Contributor Author

by the way have pushed PR under v6, is that right or should it be v7 now ? if there is need for me to cpy/paste from 6 to 7 kindly let me know

@lolabeis
Copy link
Contributor

Marked as backward incompatible, as the proposed change involves some removal / replacement of an enum.

@lolabeis lolabeis removed the backward-incompatible Likely to be backward-incompatible; must be on Steering WG roadmap; 2 maintainers to approve label Apr 14, 2025
@lolabeis
Copy link
Contributor

Removing the "backward-incompatible" label, as the newly proposed build no longer involves any such change.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment