Who makes the decisions around here?

Recording the execution decision maker is a new requirement under MiFID II. Working out how to populate that field turns out to be trickier than expected. Take a buy-side that gives strict execution instructions on how to execute its agency care order. On the one hand, you could argue that the sell-side made no decisions and therefore records NORE (MiFID II speak for client). On the other hand, you could say that by accepting the order and the instruction... Read More

The MiFID II waiting game

We are now well into October and market participants are still waiting patiently for ESMA to provide details of instrument data for MiFID II. The industry is keen to consume important data to drive functionality and trading strategies; basics such as which instruments are in scope, which are classed as liquid, what is large in scale and where the equity dark volume caps will fall. The download interface mechanisms also remain a mystery. ESMA did publish... Read More

Bottlenecks ahead

ESMA issued a public statement yesterday recognising that there is just not enough time to review all the pre-trade transparency waivers and position limits before MiFID II comes into force on 3rd January. Rather than create an impasse they have, thankfully, opted for a pragmatic approach to get things moving along. To smooth the path, in the absence of an ESMA opinion, the national competent authorities (NCAs) can proceed for now based on their own... Read More

A position of responsibility

As the MiFID II implementation date draws closer, implications for US firms continue to emerge. One area raising questions in the listed derivatives space is around position reporting and commodity position limits. Under MiFID II, EU investment firms are required to submit position reports to the regulators. Position limits under MiFID II are applicable to a “person” which is, presumably, the end client. However, in a recent Q &... Read More

Make room for some blocks

Block trading is unique as it enjoys rare bi-partisan support by practitioners and politicians alike. Unfortunately, relatively few people know how to navigate among block venues, due to their inherent opacity. To make matters worse, even fewer market participants command orders exceeding the Large in Scale (LIS) thresholds and decide to execute them in one go rather than put them through the algo-grinder churning out thousands of tiny trades. With... Read More

For infosec the only way is global

With information security rapidly gaining prominence over the last few years legislators have jumped into action to improve safeguards and public confidence in IT systems. While information security concerns prevail across all industries, in financial services due regard for them is absolutely crucial to the maintenance of functioning markets. Just imagine CCPs losing data on their clients’ positions, or banks tweeting their clients’ accounts... Read More

Commodities ancillary test moves forward

The commodity derivatives ancillary test is easily one of the most complex pieces within MiFID II, making the double volume cap in equities look more like an amuse-bouche. The new test determines whether a firm’s dealing in commodity derivatives is merely an ancillary activity, allowing it to stay out of scope for MiFID II. Trying to summarise the test in a few simple slides highlights its convoluted nature. ESMA recently published its partial... Read More

A case for regulatory freeze?

Market participants are naturally worried about the immediate costs of regulation, some of them still uncertain about the future benefits. But with all the twists and turns on the road to regulatory change, meeting the requirements imposed by regulators is no easy task. Whatever the legislation, the politicians agree on the broad principles and set a go-live date and then the clock starts ticking to agree the finer details and deliver the software.... Read More

Putting MiFID II into practice

As firms march headlong towards 2018 the detailed implementation of MiFID II is well and truly underway. Even in the equities camp where MiFID II, remember, is an intended adjustment to existing rules, the practicalities of trade and transaction reporting mechanics are evolving. Whether ESMA ever envisaged such a complex campaign is debatable, but early advocates of splitting MiFID II up into more manageable chunks may not have been far off the mark.... Read More

Sometimes it’s tough being average

Back in March the CME Group postponed the effective date of amendments to Rule 553 (“Average Price System”) until July 2, 2018 to allow sufficient time for affected Exchange Clearing Member Firms and CME Clearing to make the necessary changes to implement the rule. CME Rule 553 permits a clearing member firm to calculate an average price for trades via its own internally developed average pricing system, rather than requiring the use of... Read More

The same, only different?

For MiFID II to work, the industry must have a clear understanding of what constitutes a single instrument. For cash products such as equity or debt this is straightforward, but in derivatives the concept of a single instrument isn’t really appropriate and things quickly get complicated. Looking ahead, it’s feasible that an OTF or SI offers trading in a bilateral cleared instrument which is similar to a centrally cleared instrument traded... Read More

The far reaches of reporting

Trade and transaction reporting rules under MiFID and EMIR can easily be confused, even though they have different requirements, different formats and, most importantly, different scopes. To recap, MiFID trade reporting is a short message to the public, intraday, for the purpose of price discovery; transaction reporting is a long message to the regulator, at the end of the day, for market surveillance purposes. In terms of scope, MiFID II restricts... Read More

Next Page »

Copyright © 2017 Fidessa group plc. All rights reserved.

The information contained within this website is provided for informational purposes only. Fidessa will use reasonable care to ensure that information is accurate at the time it is made available, and for the duration that it remains on the site. The information may be changed by Fidessa at any time without notice. We also reserve the right to close the website at any time. No representation or warranty, expressed or implied, is given on behalf of Fidessa or any of its respective directors, employees, agents, or advisers as to the accuracy or completeness of the information or opinions contained herein or its suitability for any purpose and, save in the case of fraud, all liability for direct, indirect, special, consequential or other loss or damages of whatever kind that may arise from use of the website is hereby excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any decisions you make based on the information in this website are your sole responsibility and information on the website should not be relied upon in connection with any investment decision.

The copyright of this website belongs to Fidessa. All other intellectual property rights are reserved.

Reproduction or redistribution of this information is prohibited except with written permission from Fidessa.