23 August 2014

65582

Anne Plested - Fidessa

10 | posts 24,347 | views 1 | comments

A consolidation of data?

20 March 2014  |  1766 views  |  1

So what does MiFID II finally say about the consolidated tape? If you remember the story so far, a number of Consolidated Tape Providers, or CTPs – each authorised to operate the data reporting services – are supposed to compete to provide said tape. And if you ever wondered what the collective noun for a group of CTPs is, it appears to be ‘an authorisation’. These CTPs will be required to consolidate post-trade equities data (and later non-equities data) from all the APAs (Authorised Publication Arrangements) and trading venues and “…consolidate it into a continuous electronic data stream and make the information available to the public as close to real time as is technically possible, on a reasonable commercial basis.”

The introduction of “all” in the latest text caught my eye. It suggests that each CTP will be covering the entire market of post-trade data, rather than fostering standardisation across CTPs that would consolidate data from a subset of APAs and venues. Mind you, Article 67 alludes to aggregation of data published by different CTPs which kind of contradicts the ‘all’.

So the consolidated tape is indeed coming with MiFID II and all that fragmented data will be joined up again to provide a consolidated view of trade transparency. Just how the commercials will stack up, and how reasonable the cost of usage rights to that data will be, are still for the ESMA working groups to fathom. (Would that be a ‘parliament’ or perhaps a ‘cohort’ of working groups?). And if all else fails, MiFID II still makes provision for a public procurement process to establish the tape.

TagsTrade executionRisk & regulation

Comments: (2)

Pradeep Hardikar - Cognizant Technology Solutions - Pune | 29 April, 2014, 08:23

Looks like this is similar to the CAT initiative in the US. One point to note though. All these consolidated tapes etc assume that the time reported on any event is the correct time however there does not seem to be any legislation on synchronizing times of all the market places. Is there? In the US before they introduced OATS, there was an initiative to ensure everyone synchs their clocks. What about Europe?

Anne Plested - Fidessa - London | 18 June, 2014, 14:15

Thanks for your comment. Article 50(1) of MiFID II requires all Member States to oblige all trading venues and those accessing venues to trade to synchronise the business clocks they use to record the date and time of any reportable event.

Comment on this story (membership required)
Log in to receive notifications when someone posts a comment

Latest posts from Anne

Hang on a second!

17 July 2014  |  1286 views  |  0  |  Recommends 0 TagsTrade executionRisk & regulation

EU FTT, next attempt

07 May 2014  |  1030 views  |  0  |  Recommends 0 TagsTrade executionRisk & regulation

Any port in a storm?

16 April 2014  |  875 views  |  0  |  Recommends 0 TagsTrade executionRisk & regulation

A consolidation of data?

20 March 2014  |  1766 views  |  1  |  Recommends 0 TagsTrade executionRisk & regulation

MiFID II under starter's orders

15 January 2014  |  1412 views  |  0  |  Recommends 0 TagsTrade executionRisk & regulation
name

Anne Plested

job title

EU Regulation Change

company name

Fidessa

member since

2013

location

London

Summary profile See full profile »
I head up the regulation change programme for Fidessa in Europe. Since joining in 2009 I have pla...

Anne's expertise

What Anne reads
Anne writes about

Who is commenting on Anne's posts

Pradeep Hardikar