##ally important banks. second, banks ’ liquidity positions have also been strengthened with the introduction of rules such as the liquidity coverage ratio and the net stable funding ratio. third, the vulnerability of the financial system to contagion on a global scale has been curtailed, by providing incentives to clear over - the - counter ( otc ) derivatives centrally. and fourth, the market for complex and opaque securitizations – a form of financial intermediation which played an important role in the run - up to the crisis – has virtually disappeared. in europe, new rules have been approved in order to promote simple, transparent, and standardized securitizations. 1 however, cases such as the recent strong growth of the collateralized loan obligation market in the united states need to be kept under strict scrutiny to avoid repeating past errors. in spite of such progress, significant challenges remain ahead of us and we must maintain the momentum of reform. a significant source of potential vulnerability concerns the non - bank financial sector. post - crisis reforms of the regulatory framework have been much less advanced in this sector than in the banking sector. perhaps also as a consequence of this, the share of non - bank financial intermediation has grown seamlessly since the end of the last decade, with non - bank financial intermediaries often performing functions typically carried out by banks, without being subject to comparably stringent regulation and supervision. according to the financial stability board, at the end of 2016, non - bank financial intermediaries held $ 160 trillion in total assets, about one and a half times the level at the end of 2008, while over the same period banks ’ assets have risen only marginally. the non - bank financial intermediaries performing bank - like functions in 2016 held $ 45 trillion of assets. the asset management industry, the largest sector of non - banking intermediation, has almost doubled in size over the past decade. the growth of non - bank financial intermediation is increasing the sources of finance for the economy, reducing dependence on bank lending regulation ( eu ) 2017 / 2402 of the european parliament and of the council of 12 december 2017 lays down a general framework for securitization and creates a specific framework for simple, transparent and standardized securitization. and strengthening the financial system ’ s resilience. in this respect, it is a welcome complement to bank intermediation, in particular in many european economies, including italy, which have

traditionally been characterized by a bank - centric financial system, with limited room for market - based finance and non - bank financial intermediaries. at the same time, we cannot neglect the risks it may create for financial stability. some risks are similar to those faced by banks, as non - bank financial institutions are also exposed to risks related to liquidity / maturity transformation and leverage. 2 other risks, however, are of a different nature. the spread of high - frequency, quantitative / automated trading and passive management strategies contributes to making the highly concentrated asset management industry vulnerable to procyclical behaviour, which in turn has the potential to amplify market reactions to macroeconomic news, sometimes in destabilizing ways. a case in point is what happened at the beginning of last february, when some apparently innocuous news on us wage growth led to a stock market crash, with a sudden unwinding of crowded trades, and hugely negative consequences for some market players ( who had bet on low volatility ). fire sales and contagion can take place during this kind of events, which could end up having unsettling effects on financial stability, to the extent that they could threaten the resilience of financial intermediaries. other significant developments that need to be monitored closely due to possible financial stability implications concern technology and financial innovation. the profound changes in financial technology are enabling new institutions, often operating outside the banking system, as well as large technology corporations to offer services which challenge the traditional role of bank intermediaries. these changes blur the distinction between the financial and technology sectors, raise questions concerning the perimeter of current financial regulation, and give rise to new risks, such as those deriving from an increasing dependency on third - party service providers. as the adoption of digital technologies for the provision of financial services spreads, policy makers need to continue monitoring the risks from a financial stability perspective, and consider whether fintech should be a preliminary initiative on this front is the fsb policy recommendations to address structural vulnerabilities from asset management activities, 12 january 2017. regulated, who the regulator should be, and what type of regulation would be appropriate. in addressing these issues, we should be guided by the principle of ‘ same business, same risks, same rules ’. in italy, the banking law has recently been updated in order to bring the regulatory framework for finance companies, investment firms and other non - bank finance intermediaries more in line with the regime applicable to