Takeaways from the day:
• Buy-siders are unaware of exactly what to report and
penalties for failing to comply.
• Double reporting could result in fines.
• Tracking and mapping systematic internalisers has become an increasingly difficult task – particularly in fixed
• ESMA’s publishing of systematic internalisers list for
the industry ‘may not be timely’.
• Technology is not the disruptor, regulation is!
• Vast amount of inconsistency between regulators in
• Best Execution rules under MiFID II are inconsistent and
will have to identify themselves as
an SI to facilitate trading in fixed
income and other asset classes.
The panel explained that tracking
and mapping SIs has become an
increasingly difficult task – particularly in fixed income.
Citi’s Ashlin Kohler said banks
continue struggling to become
more automated in fixed income,
currency and commodities. She
explained: “We do not have an
electronic compound, so how can
we achieve this quickly and accu-
rately for our clients?”
Kohler added it is simpler for the
sell-side to become an SI in equi-
ties, but fixed income has too many
sub-classes and dealers will not be
as willing to opt in due to further
“Unlike any other asset class,
MiFID II introduces fixed income
pre-trade transparency and our
market doesn’t work like that,” she
A member of the audience asked
the panel whether the European
Securities and Markets Authority
(ESMA) would publish an SI list
for the industry to know if the
counterparty is an SI for FICC.
Bloomberg’s Hutchins answered
that ESMA is required to publish
this, although it may not be in a
timely manner. She explained the
industry is seeking a tool for this
“At a FIX Community event, we
discussed the idea of an industry