The RBA's latest assessment finds ASX still falling short in several areas, but it identifies the exchange operator's Transformation Portfolio as a potential route to meeting the standards expected of it.

"ASX is still not meeting the RBA's expectations in several important areas."

That was the assessment of Brad Jones, the Reserve Bank of Australia's Assistant Governor (Financial System), as the central bank released its Assessment of ASX Clearing and Settlement Facilities on 23 September 2026. It is a blunt sentence from an institution that usually chooses its words carefully, and it frames the situation plainly: the infrastructure that sits behind trading on Australia's main securities exchange has more work to do.

Yet the assessment is not only a list of shortcomings. The RBA also points to a way forward. It sees ASX's Transformation Portfolio, a program spanning governance, capability, culture and risk management, as a potential pathway to meeting the standards the RBA expects. Understanding what that means requires a look at what the RBA assesses, where ASX fell short, and why a broad organisational program matters as much as any single technical fix.

What the RBA is assessing, and why

When shares change hands on a stock exchange, the trade itself is only the beginning. Behind it sits a chain of post-trade processes: clearing, where obligations are calculated and a central counterparty may step between buyer and seller to guarantee completion; and settlement, where securities and money actually change hands.

The facilities that perform these functions are critical to the financial system. If they fail, the effects can ripple well beyond one exchange. For that reason, the RBA assesses clearing and settlement facilities against financial stability standards aligned with international principles for financial market infrastructures.

The RBA's latest assessment covered four ASX facilities: ASX Clear, ASX Clear (Futures), ASX Settlement and Austraclear. It found that one or more of these facilities only "partly observed" standards in four areas:

  • Governance;
  • Framework for Comprehensive Management of Risks;
  • Credit Risk;
  • Operational Risk.

"Partly observed" sits below full observance on the rating scale regulators use. It signals that weaknesses exist that need to be addressed, rather than a finding that the facilities are failing outright.

The CHESS incident and the partial upgrade

The operational risk finding has a recent history. In December 2024, ASX experienced a CHESS batch settlement incident. CHESS is the system used to settle trades in ASX-listed equities, and batch settlement is the process through which large numbers of trades are completed together. An incident in that process goes to the heart of what a settlement facility is supposed to do reliably.

Following the incident, ASX strengthened its resourcing and contingency arrangements. In its latest assessment, the RBA recognised that work by upgrading ASX Clear and ASX Settlement from "not observed" to "partly observed" on Operational Risk.

That upgrade can be read two ways. It is genuine progress: moving off the lowest rating reflects real improvement. But "partly observed" still falls short of the standard, and the RBA's message is clear that further improvement is needed. The upgrade marks a step, not the end of the journey.

Why a transformation program, not just fixes

The notable feature of the RBA's assessment is where it locates the potential solution. It is not pointing to a single system upgrade or a narrow procedural change. It is pointing to ASX's Transformation Portfolio, with its focus on governance, capability, culture and risk management.

That emphasis makes sense when set against the areas of concern. Governance and the framework for comprehensive management of risks are not problems that can be fixed with a software patch. They concern how decisions are made, how risks are identified and escalated, who is accountable, and whether an organisation has the people and skills to run critical infrastructure well. Culture, in particular, shapes whether problems are raised early or buried until they surface as incidents.

In that light, a broad organisational program is arguably the appropriate response. Technical failures often have organisational roots, such as under-investment, unclear accountability or a culture that tolerates risk. Addressing those roots is slower and less visible than fixing a system, but it is more likely to produce lasting change.

The RBA's language is measured, though. It describes the Transformation Portfolio as a potential pathway, not a guaranteed one. Programs of this kind succeed or fail on execution, and the RBA will judge ASX on results rather than intentions. It would be speculative to suggest when ASX might meet every standard in full.

Why it matters beyond the market

For most Australians, the ASX's clearing and settlement facilities are invisible. But they matter to anyone with shares, a superannuation fund invested in listed companies, or an interest in the stability of the financial system. Reliable post-trade infrastructure is part of what allows investors, from large funds to individual shareholders, to trade with confidence that transactions will be completed as expected.

The assessment also sits within a broader RBA focus on the resilience of financial infrastructure. In June 2026 the Payments System Board approved the RBA's assessment of RITS, Australia's real-time gross settlement system, against international principles, and it noted industry is targeting December 2030 for cryptographic upgrades to address quantum computing risk. The common thread is the RBA's role in ensuring that the plumbing of the financial system is robust.

Some questions observers may want to follow as the Transformation Portfolio progresses:

  • Do future assessments show improvement in the four areas rated "partly observed"?
  • Does the RBA's language about ASX shift from "potential pathway" towards evidence of delivery?
  • How does ASX report on progress across governance, capability, culture and risk management?
  • Are there further operational incidents, and how are they handled?

The bottom line

The RBA's latest assessment delivers a mixed but clear message. ASX has made some progress since the December 2024 CHESS incident, enough to lift two facilities off the lowest rating on operational risk. But in Brad Jones's words, ASX "is still not meeting the RBA's expectations in several important areas". The RBA sees the Transformation Portfolio as a possible path to compliance because the problems it has identified are, at root, about governance, capability, culture and risk management. Whether that path leads to full observance will depend on how well the program is carried out.