As the UK prepares for the 2027 shift to T+1 settlement, industry leaders stress the critical role of automation and data standards to minimise failures and costs, amid challenges and international coordination efforts.

As the UK gears up to move to a T+1 settlement cycle by October 11, 2027, industry insiders are emphasizing just how crucial automation and solid data standards are for making sure this transition goes smoothly and efficiently. During Euroclear’s Modernising Securities Markets conference, speakers pointed out that if these technologies and standards aren’t widely adopted, the costs linked to settlement failures could skyrocket—in some estimates, potentially hitting billions of euros every year.

Tim Mcleod from BlackRock brought up that European market players are currently paying around €70 million in penalties each year because of failed trades. Over a full year, that adds up to roughly €850 million. He also warned that if the settlement rates don’t see improvement as the T+1 shift approaches and after it’s implemented, failure-related costs could easily surpass €1 billion. This really underscores how serious the financial risks are if automation and data quality aren’t given enough priority across the industry.

The road to T+1 readiness isn’t exactly the same for everyone, though. Gary O’Brien from BNP Paribas shared that his bank already settles around 10-15% of trades on a T+1 or even T+0 basis every day. But really, the toughest part isn’t just preparing individual firms—it’s making sure the entire market is ready. There’s a lot of questioning about whether the frameworks that worked during the current T+2 cycle will still be good enough under this faster schedule.

One of the main themes throughout the discussions was the importance of strong data standards as the backbone for effective automation. Andrew Douglas, chair of the UK’s Accelerated Settlement Taskforce, encouraged firms to start reworking their systems now to hit automation targets, rather than waiting until the 2027 deadline. He pointed out that automating flawed or inefficient processes doesn’t do much good—something often summarized as “garbage in, garbage out.” Additionally, he urged firms to think ahead and develop business models geared for the post-trade landscape, beyond mere compliance.

An important consensus emerged: faster settlement shouldn’t mean sacrificing operational resilience. Sasha Mills from the Bank of England made it clear that with good risk management, automation, and resilient operational policies in place, the market can become both quicker and more robust at the same time.

Looking beyond the UK, the broader European context shows regulatory momentum heading in a similar direction. The European Commission has proposed shortening settlement cycles from T+2 to T+1, aiming for a transition around the same 2027 mark. This change is intended to help reduce settlement and counterparty risks, and lower costs by reducing margin requirements. France, for example, has called for faster, coordinated efforts across EU countries so that the move can be implemented smoothly and efficiently.

Meanwhile, the US has already made the switch to T+1 back in May 2024—an achievement that the SEC largely views as successful. Gary Gensler, chair of the SEC, mentioned that despite some minor issues, the market adapted quite well to the shorter settlement period, providing a useful example for other regions to look to.

Of course, some challenges remain, particularly for certain asset classes like ETFs and bonds. The European Securities and Markets Authority’s advisory group has cautioned that T+1 could cause a temporary spike in settlement failures for these instruments. To help counterbalance that, they’ve proposed exempting ETFs from penalties during the initial adjustment period, to avoid unnecessary liquidity issues.

Another aspect that complicates matters is cross-border portfolios managed by asset managers. For instance, State Street Global Advisors pointed out that their Luxembourg funds, which still follow a T+2 cycle, might face added costs because of the US’s shift to T+1—things like short-term credit costs and higher broker fees. This highlights just how tricky it can be to coordinate settlement cycles worldwide, especially given the liquidity and currency risks that come into play.

All in all, while automation and standardization hold the promise of significantly cutting down settlement times and risk exposure, realizing these benefits depends heavily on early, coordinated efforts across the industry and comprehensive system upgrades. The UK’s goal should be to be fully compliant well before the 2027 deadline, making sure that October 11 arrives smoothly—without disruption—and with the market already adapted to the new, faster settlement pace.


References:

  • - Paragraph 1: [1], [2]
  • - Paragraph 2: [1], [2]
  • - Paragraph 3: [1], [2]
  • - Paragraph 4: [1]
  • - Paragraph 5: [1], [4], [6]
  • - Paragraph 6: [5]
  • - Paragraph 7: [3]
  • - Paragraph 8: [7]
  • - Paragraph 9: [1], [2]

Source: Noah Wire Services

Verification / Sources

  • https://www.thetradenews.com/settlement-failure-costs-could-soar-into-the-billions-under-t1-without-automation-and-strong-data-standards/ - Please view link - unable to able to access data
  • https://www.thetradenews.com/settlement-failure-costs-could-soar-into-the-billions-under-t1-without-automation-and-strong-data-standards/ - As the UK prepares to transition to a T+1 settlement cycle on 11 October 2027, experts at Euroclear's Modernising Securities Markets conference emphasised the importance of strong data standards and automation for a successful shift. They noted that, without these measures, settlement failure costs could escalate into the billions. Tim Mcleod from BlackRock highlighted that European market participants currently pay €70 million in cash penalties for failed trades annually, amounting to €850 million. He warned that without improved settlement rates, costs could surpass a billion euros. The discussion also addressed challenges like the lack of standardisation in settlement instructions and the need for widespread industry preparation. Gary O’Brien from BNP Paribas pointed out that while his firm settles 10-15% of trades on a T+1 or T+0 basis daily, the broader industry must ensure comprehensive readiness. Andrew Douglas, chair of the UK Accelerated Settlement Taskforce, stressed the necessity of starting automation efforts now, rather than waiting for the transition deadline, to achieve the desired efficiency and resilience in the T+1 environment.
  • https://www.ft.com/content/b5033376-8de8-4d5d-9411-0879d1639b28 - An advisory group to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has warned that exchange-traded funds (ETFs) could face increased settlement failures when the EU moves to a T+1 settlement cycle. The Securities Markets Stakeholder Group highlighted that the transition could temporarily raise settlement fails, particularly for bonds and ETFs, due to the complexity of the European post-trading landscape. The group recommended that ESMA consider exempting the ETF industry from trade penalties during this period to prevent negative impacts on market liquidity. The move to T+1 in the EU is being discussed, with a potential transition mooted for 2028 at the latest, following the US's shift to T+1 in May 2024.
  • https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/france-urges-europe-step-up-work-faster-stock-market-settlements-2024-07-22/ - France's Bank of France and financial market regulator have called for accelerated efforts to reduce the settlement time for stock trades in Europe from two business days (T+2) to one (T+1). This initiative aims to align Europe with Wall Street's recent change to a T+1 cycle, which was implemented in the U.S. in May. EU officials suggested that legislation might be necessary to achieve this change. The shift to a T+1 settlement cycle in the U.S. is intended to enhance market efficiency, though it may reduce the time foreign investors have to manage securities and funds. Other regions, including Canada, Mexico, and the UK, are also moving towards adopting similar reforms to lessen counterparty risk and improve market liquidity. France's statement emphasizes the importance of a coordinated transition among European jurisdictions.
  • https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/move-faster-settlements-us-securities-has-gone-smoothly-sec-chair-says-2024-05-31/ - The U.S. securities market successfully transitioned to a one-day settlement cycle (T+1) from the previous two-day cycle (T+2), following an SEC rule change adopted in February. SEC Chair Gary Gensler confirmed that the conversion proceeded smoothly, with all trades having settled. Although there were some minor issues, market participants generally reported a positive transition. The SEC remains in close communication with clearinghouses and other market entities to monitor the ongoing transition, particularly in light of anticipated increases in trading volumes.
  • https://finance.ec.europa.eu/news/t1-settlement-2025-02-14_en - The European Commission has published a proposal to shorten the settlement cycle in the EU from two days (T+2) to one (T+1) for transactions in transferable securities executed on trading venues. The proposed amendment to the Central Securities Depository Regulation (CSDR) aims to enhance the efficiency and competitiveness of post-trade financial market services. The move to T+1 is expected to reduce risks related to settlement, such as counterparty risk, and bring cost savings through reduced margin requirements. The transition is planned for 11 October 2027, providing market participants with time to develop and agree on standards and processes.
  • https://www.ft.com/content/5471b6ef-12ed-4cf4-acb1-8a3ae4fc9dfe - State Street Global Advisors (SSGA) has alerted investors about potential additional costs due to the transition to a T+1 settlement cycle in the US, scheduled to take effect on May 28. This shift reduces the settlement time for US equities and corporate bonds from two days (T+2) to one day (T+1). While many firms are adjusting their European fund settlement cycles accordingly, SSGA's Luxembourg Sicav fund will maintain a T+2 cycle, leading to possible added expenses for certain sub-funds. These costs could arise from factors such as short-term credit, swing pricing, anti-dilution levies, and increased broker fees. Additionally, managing the liquidity mismatch between North American and non-North American securities could further complicate matters. Other firms like Pictet, Redwheel, Sands Capital, and Veritas Asset Management are adapting their settlement cycles at varying levels to align with the US changes. Portfolio managers will need to strategize for the mismatched settlement times and currency conversions across different jurisdictions. The fund board holds the ultimate responsibility for managing these transitions and the associated cost and performance impacts.

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first emerged. We've since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score: 10

Notes: The narrative is current, published on 12 September 2025, and addresses the upcoming T+1 settlement cycle transition scheduled for 11 October 2027. No earlier versions of this specific content were found, indicating originality.

Quotes check

Score: 10

Notes: The direct quotes from Tim McLeod, Gary O’Brien, and Andrew Douglas are unique to this report, with no earlier matches found online, suggesting exclusivity.

Source reliability

Score: 8

Notes: The narrative originates from The TRADE, a reputable financial news outlet. However, the specific author, Natasha Cocksedge, does not have a widely established public presence, which slightly reduces the overall reliability score.

Plausability check

Score: 9

Notes: The claims regarding potential settlement failure costs under the T+1 transition are plausible and align with industry discussions. The emphasis on automation and strong data standards is consistent with recommendations from the UK Accelerated Settlement Taskforce. The narrative's tone and language are appropriate for the financial industry, with no inconsistencies noted.

Overall assessment

Veredict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary: The narrative is timely, original, and presents plausible claims supported by industry discussions. The source is reputable, and the quotes are exclusive, enhancing the credibility of the report.