Governance in the benchmarks sector – review

Although the review does not introduce new rules, its findings will shape supervisory expectations and may trigger targeted follow-up. Benchmark administrators should treat the findings as a clear signal to strengthen governance frameworks, board effectiveness, conflicts management, and accountability. Compliance teams should conduct a gap analysis against the review's themes, focusing on independent challenge, record-keeping, escalation, and third-party oversight.

Users of benchmarks should also reassess due diligence and monitoring of providers, as governance failures can affect data integrity and market confidence. Key actions: 1) Benchmark administrators: map current governance against FCA findings, document remediation, and report progress to the board. 2) Firms reliant on benchmarks: review contractual and operational resilience around benchmark provision.

3) All regulated firms: use the review as a health check for governance of critical data and indices. Business impact: remediation costs are likely moderate, but the reputational and supervisory risk of inaction is higher. Firms with robust governance can differentiate themselves and strengthen client trust.

No immediate deadline, but early action is advisable to avoid supervisory attention. RegCanary recommends treating this as a priority for the next governance cycle.