Looking For Efficiencies With The AFME Questionnaire

The AFME journey

When I joined Standard Bank’s Investor Services team in 2017, the AFME post-trade due diligence questionnaire (DDQ) was in its first year. I was told a standard questionnaire would make respondents’ lives easier. The number of questions we received increased by 75%. There were the early adopters, who issued the AFME DDQ together with their existing DDQs; and the ‘let’s see what this is all about’ clients who asked for completed AFME DDQs to read through.

Improvements along the way

Six years later we are now working on the questionnaire’s fifth iteration. There is no doubt that the DDQ has become slicker. In our experience at Standard Bank, as the sub-custodian for 8 out of the top 10 global custodians, we are still responding to just as many questions. All our top clients ask supplementary questions to AFME – in 2022 these averaged at 105 questions, and altogether each client asks an average of 2,157 questions.

What has also changed is the use of technology in issuing the DDQs. Six years ago, there was only one tech provider. Today we respond to DDQs on numerous different systems. All use different technologies.

Note: based on the top 18 clients in Standard Bank’s portfolio

The call for interoperability

Last year I persuaded AFME to investigate a technical standard for the AFME DDQ. We have standard questions, so why can’t we have standard tech? Why does this matter for responders? We can maintain our AFME responses in one format and be able to upload it across different platforms. The lack of interoperability introduces manual work and risks.