The market is rife with vendors offering ‘inexpensive’ solutions to the imminent problem of filing COREP disclosures to National Competent Authorities around Europe. In particular, smaller firms with relatively straightforward needs may be tempted by the promise of ‘cheap and cheerful’ products. Creating the XBRL documents is a fairly simple process, but organisations should think through the wider issues. Licensing the right application will not be enough, whatever your vendor tells you.
Many regulators are still finalising their reporting rules, but even at this late stage the EBA’s guidelines are quite likely to change before the due date for the first submissions. Some vendors will struggle to cope when the regulatory requirements change, not only before the initial filing date, but when further alterations occur, as they will surely do over time. To what extent do vendors really understand the implications? How quickly can they react to ensure that fully compliant XBRL is generated? What happens if things go wrong?
Proven XBRL expertise is vital, especially at the service level, if vendors are to overcome any problems encountered by their clients.
What makes CoreFiling different? We have been developing XBRL products and offering expert XBRL consultancy for well over ten years. CoreFiling are the firm that provides XBRL support to many of the world’s leading integrators and consultancy firms. Our expertise is built on a deep understanding of the XBRL standard. CoreFiling are active contributors to the XBRL consortium that oversees the XBRL specifications; the company undertook most of the work in developing the key technical specification behind Eurofiling. This affords us deep insight into the standard and informs our products and services.
Seahorse®, available via key CoreFiling partners, provides a straightforward, Excel-based solution for COREP, FINREP and Solvency II filing. However, behind Seahorse lies over 200 man-years of intellectual property and proven expertise.
You may be thinking that Seahorse sounds fine for smaller organisations, but what about larger financial institutions with more complex needs?
More in a few days’ time…