The recent and ongoing speculation around the possible delay in MiFID II’s implementation date – currently scheduled for January 2017 – should not distract market practitioners from the task in hand: to assess their obligations under the regulation and take appropriate steps towards meeting a tight deadline. Even a delay of one year does not create much breathing space.
So what should firms be doing now?
First, now that ESMA has published its final guidance, the scale of the requirement is clear. Firms need quickly to understand how they are affected – and whether certain business activities are worth the pain of compliance.
Key requirements – or areas of focus – identified by Itiviti clients include the following:
– Systematic Internalisers (SI)
– Enhanced transparency
– Best Execution
– Clock synchronization
– Pre-trade risk
– Instrument definition management
– Trading algorithm testing
– Management of all MiFID parameters (LIS, SMS, SSTI etc.)
Each of these aspects will require significant action. Last month, we published a paper – ‘MiFID II: Practical Considerations of Gainful Compliance’. In it, we offered suggestions on how best to approach each (you can download the paper here ).
As part of our research for this paper, we surveyed select market participants on how they planned to approach the incoming regulation. From their responses, it is clear that a flexible approach to market structure changes is required to minimize risk in responding to the new European trading landscape and the expected and unforeseen innovation that will accompany the adoption of MiFID II.
Certainly, the marketplace has already begun to respond, with venues and ISVs announcing solutions to specific elements of the regulation. Any approach to compliance needs to support the ability to respond to these market-led developments, so that financial institutions are able to take advantage of emerging solutions.
Our survey also underscored the perceived role of incumbent ISVs in firms’ planned response to their MiFID II obligations. Particularly given the tight deadline the marketplace is facing, survey respondents expected to include innovations from their ISVs – instead of building, or as a complement to, their own solutions – for help in meeting the emerging requirements.
As part of the paper, Itiviti has developed a checklist for those looking to their ISVs as they assess their MiFID II obligations:
– To what extent has your organization engaged with the regulators to understand client obligations under MiFID II?
– How far can we deploy MiFID I capabilities to meet MiFID II requirements?
– How will clock synchronization be handled?
– Storage of order and trade data is one thing, but how do we extract and analyses the data to provide meaningful information to the regulator?
– How is market abuse monitoring structured?
– Is the data model adapted for the new MMT (Market Model Typology) standard?
– Is there capacity enough to handle the anticipated growth in market data volumes?
– How easy is it to deploy a Systematic Internaliser engine, with low cost and short lead-times?
Whether or not MiFID II’s implementation date is postponed, now is the time to get to work on your firm’s response to this wide-ranging regulation. There are no short cuts. But ISVs can play a vital role by providing resource, expertise and technological knowhow. It’s worth asking your ISVs these questions before you commit to working with them on this project
FIX Infrastructure It goes without saying that it’s imperative for trading technologists to thoroughly test their systems before the put them in a production environment. Clearly, building a market-beating trading platform requires a high level of uptime and a propensity for failure that’s as close to zero as possible. And for years technologists have used a range […] November 5, 2018
Risk & Compliance Nine months into the MiFID II era, it’s time to look beyond the compliance issues and start considering the business opportunities presented to firms operating under the Systematic Internaliser regime. With the support from a value-adding regulatory solution, SI status can be used for competitive advantage, suggests Jonas Lindqvist, Principal, Trading and Trade Execution, Itiviti. […] October 9, 2018
Risk & Compliance Trading firms across the board are discovering that operational and regulatory requirements increasingly demand a consistent approach to connectivity, messaging and data management. To industrialize their response to these emerging requirements – to address the challenges in a streamlined, consistent and scalable way – firms need to put in place a centralized connectivity and messaging […] September 25, 2018
Risk & Compliance MiFID II marked a sea change in the approach to the handling of order, trade and transaction data. Rigorous new requirements around data capture, analysis, reporting and record-keeping made the communication of data a central theme in ensuring trading systems were MiFID II compliant, and connectivity – between external and internal systems, databases and processors […] August 14, 2018
By submitting this form, you acknowledge that data collected by us will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Notice.