Aequitas Amends Exchange Proposals
Aequitas made headlines when it announced its intentions to form an exchange that would obviate the influence of high-frequency trading, which it describes as "predatory". The OSC took issue with Aequitas's plans to impose restrictions on visible orders, which it said contravened its guidelines.
"We are very thankful to the industry and the regulators for all their feedback," says Jos Schmitt, CEO at Aequitas Innovations. "Their engagement led us to a series of amendments which will allow us to even more effectively deliver on our mandate to build innovative solutions, create meaningful choice and competition, enhance market fairness by curbing predatory high-frequency trading, and address capital raising issues."
Aequitas has amended its proposals so that, instead of blocking access to high-frequency strategies, it will implement speed bumps and put measures in place to make it uneconomical to trade in this fashion. Those using direct market access through a member, also, will be unable to act as market makers.
The firm will file its exchange application with the OSC in the first quarter of 2014, with a goal of beginning operations in the first half of 2015.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Trading Tech
Doubts raised over new FX platform disclosures
New disclosure sheet template will require platforms to outline how they charge for data
Expanded oversight for tech or a rollback? 2025 set to be big for regulators
From GenAI oversight to DORA and the CAT to off-channel communication, the last 12 months set the stage for larger regulatory conversations in 2025.
DORA flood pitches banks against vendors
Firms ask vendors for late addendums sometimes unrelated to resiliency, requiring renegotiation
IPC’s C-suite shuffle signals bigger changes for trader voice tech
Waters Wrap: After a series of personnel changes at the legacy provider, WatersTechnology examines what these moves might mean for the future of turrets and trader voice.
WatersTechnology latest edition
Check out our latest edition, plus more than 12 years of our best content.
From no chance to no brainer: Inside outsourced trading’s buy-side charm offensive
Previously regarded with hesitancy and suspicion by the buy side, four asset managers explain their reasons for embracing outsourced trading.
Band-aids vs build-outs: Best practices for exchange software migrations
Heetesh Rawal writes that legacy exchange systems are under pressure to scale to support new asset classes and greater volumes, leaving exchange operators with a stark choice: patch up outdated systems and hope for the best or embark on risky but rewarding replacement projects.
Portfolio trading vs RFQ: Understanding transaction costs in US investment-grade bonds
The MarketAxess research team explores how such factors as order size, liquidity profiles and associated costs determine whether a portfolio trade or an RFQ list trade is the optimal choice.
