Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Owner data doesn't join well with Legal Entity Identifier database (GLEIF) #24

Open
MichaelTiemannOSC opened this issue Jan 21, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@MichaelTiemannOSC
Copy link

The GLEIF database (https://www.gleif.org/en/lei-data/gleif-golden-copy) maps corporate names to legal entity identifiers, which allows one to connect power plant ownership information to financial instruments such as stocks and bonds.

Examples:
PG&E Operates several power plants in California. The WRI Power Plant Database lists the owner as "Pacific Gas & Electric Co." But in the GLEIF database this company is listed as "PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY". Humans see these as the same, but matching up 30,000 ownership records is a lot of work to maintain.

A solution would be to add an LEI field for owners that have LEI data (PG&E's LEI is 1HNPXZSMMB7HMBMVBS46 as can be seen here: https://search.gleif.org/#/record/1HNPXZSMMB7HMBMVBS46). The LEI data then connects to 274 ISINs (unique financial instruments), which can then feed financial models.

The alternative is to build a mapping table from WRI owner names to LEIs as a stand-alone table that needs to be maintained separately. But if you added an LEI field, contributors could populate those fields all in one place.

LEI data has the benefit that it can also connect into the "who owns whom" hierarchy, so if people are looking to see who ultimately holds the paper for a given power plant, LEIs can be very powerful.

@MichaelTiemannOSC MichaelTiemannOSC added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 21, 2021
@MichaelTiemannOSC
Copy link
Author

Here are 8132 matches to get you started. It is possible that some are erroneous, but they can be fixed case by case going forward. Much better than starting from zero!

gppd2lei.csv.zip

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant