Both factors I and II support the argument for multiple CCPs. The first factor highlights the importance of local CCPs in clearing transactions of regional financial institutions in their local currency. This is crucial because different regions have different currencies, and transactions need to be cleared in the currency in which they are denominated. Having a local CCP ensures that this process is efficient and effective. The second factor emphasizes the specialization of regional CCPs in certain products. Financial products are diverse and complex, and it is challenging for a single entity to specialize in all of them. Regional CCPs, by focusing on specific products, can provide more efficient and effective clearing services. Therefore, both factors support the argument for multiple CCPs, making choice C the correct answer.

Choice A is incorrect. While it is true that geographical markets tend to have their own 'local' CCPs to clear transactions of regional financial institutions denominated in their local currency, this is not the only factor supporting the argument for multiple CCPs. Factor II also supports this argument as regional CCPs specialize in certain products like credit default swaps, FRAs, etc., and a single global central counterparty may not be sufficient to specialize in every clearable product.

Choice B is incorrect. Although Factor II does support the argument for multiple CCPs due to specialization in certain products, it's not the sole reason. Factor I also contributes by highlighting that geographical markets prefer having their own 'local' CCPs for clearing transactions of regional financial institutions denominated in their local currency.