Connect with us
MARE BALTICUM Gaming & TECH Summit 2024

Fintech

SEC Adopts Rules to Modernize Key Market Infrastructure Responsible for Collecting, Consolidating, and Disseminating Equity Market Data

Published

on

Washington, D.C.–(Newsfile Corp. – December 9, 2020) – The Securities and Exchange Commission today adopted rules to modernize the infrastructure for the collection, consolidation, and dissemination of market data for exchange-listed national market system stocks (“NMS market data”).  This infrastructure has not been significantly updated since its initial implementation in the late 1970s.  The adopted rules update and significantly expand the content of NMS market data to better meet the diverse needs of investors in today’s equity markets.  The adopted rules also update the method by which NMS market data is consolidated and disseminated, by fostering a competitive environment and providing for a new decentralized model that promises reduced latency and other new efficiencies. 

“Today’s rules are part of our larger initiative and ongoing efforts to modernize our equity market regulatory structure to address significant changes in our trading markets and better fit the needs of investors—both retail and institutional—and other market participants, including issuers.  In particular, these rules are designed to increase competition and transparency, which will improve data quality and data access for all market participants,” said Chairman, Jay Clayton. 

“The content of national market system data for equities and the consolidation and dissemination of that data have lagged meaningfully behind the technologies and data content widely used for proprietary data products offered by exchanges.  The rules adopted today address these issues and, for the first time, foster a competitive environment for processing and distributing NMS market data,” said Director, Brett Redfearn.  

In 1975, one of Congress’s principal objectives for the national market system was to assure the availability of information with respect to quotations for, and transactions in, securities.  The national securities exchanges and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA” and collectively, the “SROs”) have acted jointly to collect, consolidate, and disseminate information for NMS stocks.  For each NMS stock, the SROs were required to provide specified NMS market data to exclusive securities information processors (“SIPs”).  The SIPs then consolidated that information and made it available to the public.  The rules adopted today are designed to modernize and improve upon that historical infrastructure, by expanding the content of NMS market data and replacing the historical “exclusive SIP” model with a decentralized model of “competing consolidators.” 

* * *

FACT SHEET

Market Data Infrastructure

Current Regulatory Framework

NMS market data is made widely available to investors through the national market system, a system set forth by Congress in Section 11A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and facilitated by the Commission in Regulation NMS.  The current national market system for NMS information was developed in the late 1970s.  This system features a centralized consolidation model in which the SROs act jointly under the Equity Data Plans to provide specified NMS market data for each NMS stock to exclusive SIPs.  The exclusive SIPs then consolidate that information and disseminate a national best bid and national best offer (“NBBO”) and last sale information.  While the Commission has been monitoring the effectiveness of its NMS rules and has revised certain rules, the Commission has not significantly updated the rules that govern the content and dissemination of NMS market data since their initial implementation in the late 1970s, even though technologies as well as business and trading practices have changed dramatically since then.

Market Developments

Significant technological changes have occurred since the 1970s and the enactment of Section 11A in the 1975 amendments to the Exchange Act.  In particular, the combination of technological advances and order routing and trading strategies have greatly increased the speed and automation of markets, making trading more market data dependent, in terms of content, access, and processing speed.  In response, exchanges have developed enhanced proprietary data and connectivity products.  The content and latency differentials between SIP data and the proprietary market data products disseminated directly by the exchanges have become increasingly important.

Adopted Rules

The content of NMS market data and the model for collecting, consolidating, and disseminating NMS market data have not kept pace with the needs of market participants.  The rules adopted today seek to address this concern in two fundamental ways:  (1) the rules update and expand the content of NMS market data; and (2) the rules establish a decentralized consolidation model in which competing consolidators, rather than the exclusive SIPs, will be responsible for collecting, consolidating, and disseminating consolidated market data to the public.

Content of NMS Market Data

As illustrated in the examples provided in the chart below, the rules adopted today update and expand the content of NMS market data to include:  (1) information about orders in share amounts smaller than the current round lot size (e.g., 100 shares); (2) information about certain orders that are outside of an exchange’s best bid and best offer (i.e., certain depth of book data); and (3) information about orders that are participating in opening, closing, and other auctions.

Examples of Content of Previous vs. New NMS Market Data

Previous

New

Last sale data/transaction reports

The price, size and exchange of the last sale of the NMS stock, including odd-lot transactions.

No change.

Best bid and best offer (“BBO”)

BBOs for each SRO in round lot sizes (e.g., 100 shares).

 

BBOs for each SRO in revised round lot sizes based on the new “round lot” definition:

  • $250.00 or less per share:  round lot = 100 shares;
  • $250.01 to $1,000.00 per share:  round lot = 40 shares;
  • $1,000.01 to $10,000.00 per share:  round lot = 10 shares; and
  • $10,000.01 or more per share:  round lot = 1 share. 

National best bid and national best offer

NBBO is based on the round lot size quotations. 

NBBO will be based on the new round lot size quotations.

Odd-lot quotations

Not included.

Odd-lot quotations at a price greater than or equal to the national best bid (NBB) and less than or equal to the national best offer (NBO), aggregated at each price level at each SRO.

Protected quotations

Protected quotations are in round lots.

   

Protected quotations will be in new round lots.   

Depth of book data

Not included. 

New “depth of book data” will include quotation sizes at each national securities exchange and on a facility of a national securities association at each of the next five prices at which there is a bid that is lower than the NBB and offer that is higher than the NBO.

Auction information

A limited range of auction information was provided by the Equity Data Plans, such as reopening auction information following Limit-Up Limit-Down (“LULD”) pauses and certain NYSE auction information.  

New “auction information” will include any information specified by SRO rules or effective NMS Plans that is generated by an SRO leading up to and during an auction—including opening, reopening, and closing auctions—and publicly disseminated during the time periods and at the time intervals provided in such rules and plans. 

SRO-specific program data

Information regarding SRO-specific programs, such as retail liquidity programs.

All current SRO-specific program data plus any additional data elements defined as such pursuant to the effective national market system plan(s) required under Rule 603(b).   

Over-the -counter bulletin board (“OTCBB”) and concurrent use data

OTCBB quotation and transaction data and certain “concurrent use” data (i.e., corporate bond and index data) is offered in connection with current NMS market data.

This information will not be included in NMS market data under the rules adopted today.

Regulatory data

Includes information regarding short sale circuit breakers, trading pauses, regulatory halts and official opening and closing prices of the primary listing exchanges.

All current regulatory data plus a new indicator for applicable round lot sizes and any additional regulatory data elements defined as such pursuant to the effective national market system plan(s) required under Rule 603(b).

Administrative data

Includes messages specifying identifiers for market centers and issue symbols and messages regarding the beginning and end of trading sessions. 

All current administrative data plus any additional data elements defined as such pursuant to the effective national market system plan(s) required under Rule 603(b).


Decentralized Consolidation Model

The rules adopted today also introduce a decentralized consolidation model under which competing consolidators, rather than the existing exclusive SIPs, will collect, consolidate, and disseminate certain NMS information.  To support this decentralized model, the rules require each SRO to make available the data that is necessary to generate consolidated market data to two new categories of entities:  (1) competing consolidators, which will be responsible for collecting, consolidating, and disseminating consolidated market data products to the public; and (2) self-aggregators, which will be brokers, dealers, SROs, and investment advisers registered with the Commission that elect to collect and consolidate market data solely for their internal use. 

Competing consolidators will be required to register with the Commission under new Rule 614 of Regulation NMS.  All competing consolidators will be subject to certain standards with respect to the promptness, accuracy, reliability, and fairness of their operations, and competing consolidators meeting a market share threshold that are “SCI competing consolidators” will be subject to Regulation SCI.  Self-aggregators will not be required to register with the Commission in a separate capacity.

What’s Next?

The adopted rules will be effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register but in order to facilitate an orderly transition, the Commission has developed a phased transition plan that will begin in 2021.  

Fintech

How to identify authenticity in crypto influencer channels

Published

on

 

Modern brands stake on influencer marketing, with 76% of users making a purchase after seeing a product on social media.The cryptocurrency industry is no exception to this trend. However, promoting crypto products through influencer marketing can be particularly challenging. Crypto influencers pose a significant risk to a brand’s reputation and ROI due to rampant scams. Approximately 80% of channels provide fake statistics, including followers counts and engagement metrics. Additionally, this niche is characterized by high CPMs, which can increase the risk of financial loss for brands.

In this article Nadia Bubennnikova, Head of agency Famesters, will explore the most important things to look for in crypto channels to find the perfect match for influencer marketing collaborations.

 

  1. Comments 

There are several levels related to this point.

 

LEVEL 1

Analyze approximately 10 of the channel’s latest videos, looking through the comments to ensure they are not purchased from dubious sources. For example, such comments as “Yes sir, great video!”; “Thanks!”; “Love you man!”; “Quality content”, and others most certainly are bot-generated and should be avoided.

Just to compare: 

LEVEL 2

Don’t rush to conclude that you’ve discovered the perfect crypto channel just because you’ve come across some logical comments that align with the video’s topic. This may seem controversial, but it’s important to dive deeper. When you encounter a channel with logical comments, ensure that they are unique and not duplicated under the description box. Some creators are smarter than just buying comments from the first link that Google shows you when you search “buy YouTube comments”. They generate topics, provide multiple examples, or upload lists of examples, all produced by AI. You can either manually review the comments or use a script to parse all the YouTube comments into an Excel file. Then, add a formula to highlight any duplicates.

LEVEL 3

It is also a must to check the names of the profiles that leave the comments: most of the bot-generated comments are easy to track: they will all have the usernames made of random symbols and numbers, random first and last name combinations, “Habibi”, etc. No profile pictures on all comments is also a red flag.

 

LEVEL 4

Another important factor to consider when assessing comment authenticity is the posting date. If all the comments were posted on the same day, it’s likely that the traffic was purchased.

 

2. Average views number per video

This is indeed one of the key metrics to consider when selecting an influencer for collaboration, regardless of the product type. What specific factors should we focus on?

First & foremost: the views dynamics on the channel. The most desirable type of YouTube channel in terms of views is one that maintains stable viewership across all of its videos. This stability serves as proof of an active and loyal audience genuinely interested in the creator’s content, unlike channels where views vary significantly from one video to another.

Many unauthentic crypto channels not only buy YouTube comments but also invest in increasing video views to create the impression of stability. So, what exactly should we look at in terms of views? Firstly, calculate the average number of views based on the ten latest videos. Then, compare this figure to the views of the most recent videos posted within the past week. If you notice that these new videos have nearly the same number of views as those posted a month or two ago, it’s a clear red flag. Typically, a YouTube channel experiences lower views on new videos, with the number increasing organically each day as the audience engages with the content. If you see a video posted just three days ago already garnering 30k views, matching the total views of older videos, it’s a sign of fraudulent traffic purchased to create the illusion of view stability.

 

3. Influencer’s channel statistics

The primary statistics of interest are region and demographic split, and sometimes the device types of the viewers.

LEVEL 1

When reviewing the shared statistics, the first step is to request a video screencast instead of a simple screenshot. This is because it takes more time to organically edit a video than a screenshot, making it harder to manipulate the statistics. If the creator refuses, step two (if only screenshots are provided) is to download them and check the file’s properties on your computer. Look for details such as whether it was created with Adobe Photoshop or the color profile, typically Adobe RGB, to determine if the screenshot has been edited.

LEVEL 2

After confirming the authenticity of the stats screenshot, it’s crucial to analyze the data. For instance, if you’re examining a channel conducted in Spanish with all videos filmed in the same language, it would raise concerns to find a significant audience from countries like India or Turkey. This discrepancy, where the audience doesn’t align with regions known for speaking the language, is a red flag.

If we’re considering an English-language crypto channel, it typically suggests an international audience, as English’s global use for quality educational content on niche topics like crypto. However, certain considerations apply. For instance, if an English-speaking channel shows a significant percentage of Polish viewers (15% to 30%) without any mention of the Polish language, it could indicate fake followers and views. However, if the channel’s creator is Polish, occasionally posts videos in Polish alongside English, and receives Polish comments, it’s important not to rush to conclusions.

Example of statistics

 

Wrapping up

These are the main factors to consider when selecting an influencer to promote your crypto product. Once you’ve launched the campaign, there are also some markers to show which creators did bring the authentic traffic and which used some tools to create the illusion of an active and engaged audience. While this may seem obvious, it’s still worth mentioning. After the video is posted, allow 5-7 days for it to accumulate a basic number of views, then check performance metrics such as views, clicks, click-through rate (CTR), signups, and conversion rate (CR) from clicks to signups.

If you overlooked some red flags when selecting crypto channels for your launch, you might find the following outcomes: channels with high views numbers and high CTRs, demonstrating the real interest of the audience, yet with remarkably low conversion rates. In the worst-case scenario, you might witness thousands of clicks resulting in zero to just a few signups. While this might suggest technical issues in other industries, in crypto campaigns it indicates that the creator engaged in the campaign not only bought fake views and comments but also link clicks. And this happens more often than you may realize.

Summing up, choosing the right crypto creator to promote your product is indeed a tricky job that requires a lot of resources to be put into the search process. 

Author Nadia Bubennikova, Head of agency  at Famesters

Author

Nadia Bubennikova, Head of agency at Famesters

Continue Reading

Fintech

Central banks and the FinTech sector unite to change global payments space

Published

on

central-banks-and-the-fintech-sector-unite-to-change-global-payments-space

 

The BIS, along with seven leading central banks and a cohort of private financial firms, has embarked on an ambitious venture known as Project Agorá.

Named after the Greek word for “marketplace,” this initiative stands at the forefront of exploring the potential of tokenisation to significantly enhance the operational efficiency of the monetary system worldwide.

Central to this pioneering project are the Bank of France (on behalf of the Eurosystem), the Bank of Japan, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Mexico, the Swiss National Bank, the Bank of England, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. These institutions have joined forces under the banner of Project Agorá, in partnership with an extensive assembly of private financial entities convened by the Institute of International Finance (IIF).

At the heart of Project Agorá is the pursuit of integrating tokenised commercial bank deposits with tokenised wholesale central bank money within a unified, public-private programmable financial platform. By harnessing the advanced capabilities of smart contracts and programmability, the project aspires to unlock new transactional possibilities that were previously infeasible or impractical, thereby fostering novel opportunities that could benefit businesses and consumers alike.

The collaborative effort seeks to address and surmount a variety of structural inefficiencies that currently plague cross-border payments. These challenges include disparate legal, regulatory, and technical standards; varying operating hours and time zones; and the heightened complexity associated with conducting financial integrity checks (such as anti-money laundering and customer verification procedures), which are often redundantly executed across multiple stages of a single transaction due to the involvement of several intermediaries.

As a beacon of experimental and exploratory projects, the BIS Innovation Hub is committed to delivering public goods to the global central banking community through initiatives like Project Agorá. In line with this mission, the BIS will soon issue a call for expressions of interest from private financial institutions eager to contribute to this ground-breaking project. The IIF will facilitate the involvement of private sector participants, extending an invitation to regulated financial institutions representing each of the seven aforementioned currencies to partake in this transformative endeavour.

Source: fintech.globa

The post Central banks and the FinTech sector unite to change global payments space appeared first on HIPTHER Alerts.

Continue Reading

Fintech

TD Bank inks multi-year strategic partnership with Google Cloud

Published

on

td-bank-inks-multi-year-strategic-partnership-with-google-cloud

 

TD Bank has inked a multi-year deal with Google Cloud as it looks to streamline the development and deployment of new products and services.

The deal will see the Canadian banking group integrate the vendor’s cloud services into a wider portion of its technology solutions portfolio, a move which TD expects will enable it “to respond quickly to changing customer expectations by rolling out new features, updates, or entirely new financial products at an accelerated pace”.

This marks an expansion of the already established relationship between TD Bank and Google Cloud after the group previously adopted the vendor’s Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) for TD Securities Automated Trading (TDSAT), the Chicago-based subsidiary of its investment banking unit, TD Securities.

TDSAT uses GKE for process automation and quantitative modelling across fixed income markets, resulting in the development of a “data-driven research platform” capable of processing large research workloads in trading.

Dan Bosman, SVP and CIO of TD Securities, claims the infrastructure has so far supported TDSAT with “compute-intensive quantitative analysis” while expanding the subsidiary’s “trading volumes and portfolio size”.

TD’s new partnership with Google Cloud will see the group attempt to replicate the same level of success across its entire portfolio.

Source: fintechfutures.com

The post TD Bank inks multi-year strategic partnership with Google Cloud appeared first on HIPTHER Alerts.

Continue Reading

Trending