Exchanges, Users Face Off Over Data Fees
Users objected that the fees-which were first proposed in September last year, but did not come to a head until they were highlighted at FISD meetings in December-were vague and potentially excessive. TSX tried to clarify users' concerns, and capped the fees at nine servers, but relented after the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association wrote to the exchange warning that its members would not be ready to report server usage by January, and requesting that they delay the charges, if not reconsider them entirely.
In March, the SWX Swiss Exchange (now known as the SIX Swiss Exchange) announced plans to introduce additional charges for use of data in non-display applications, following a similar initiative by Deutsche Börse the previous year (IMD, March 17). However, by June, when Deutsche Börse unveiled a revised, flat-fee policy, European banks were beginning to push back against the unpopular charges, with some firms reportedly delaying signing new contracts with the exchange. Nevertheless, Georg Gross, head of front-office data and analytics at Deutsche Börse, said that 100 firms had already signed the new policy (IMD, June 9).
Meanwhile, NYSE Arca finally gained Securities and Exchange Commission approval to charge fees for market data that used to be distributed free of charge by Arca prior to its purchase by the New York Stock Exchange. The SEC had not allowed NYSE to charge for the data after objections from Web interest group NetCoalition, which also held up approvals for fee-liable products from other exchanges. Although SIFMA objected to the approval, the SEC re-affirmed its decision in December, and plans to re-introduce the fees in January (IMD, Dec. 8).
CME Group also came under fire for plans to introduce charges for historical end of day, time and sales, best bid and offer, and full market depth data from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Chicago Board of Trade, New York Mercantile Exchange and Comex that firms had collected from the exchange group's real-time datafeeds to make available to their clients (IMD, Nov. 15).
The exchange contended that even though firms may have collected and packaged the data themselves, they still needed to pay for licenses before redistributing it to anyone else. Over the course of a series of announcements based on client feedback, CME reduced the fees, then subsequently delayed them until further notice in order to collect further feedback.
Max BowieOnly 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: https://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 Data Management
Market data costs defy cyclicality
Trading firms continue to grapple with escalating market data costs. Can innovative solutions and strategic approaches bring relief?
LSEG partners with Citi, DTCC goes on-chain, AI on the brain, and more
The Waters Cooler: Trading Technologies buys OpenGamma, CT Plan updates, and the beginning of benchmarking in this week’s news roundup.
AI & data enablement: A looming reality or pipe dream?
Waters Wrap: The promise of AI and agents is massive, and real-world success stories are trickling out. But Anthony notes that firms still need to be hyper-focused on getting the data foundation correct before adding layers.
Data managers worry lack of funding, staffing will hinder AI ambitions
Nearly two-thirds of respondents to WatersTechnology’s data benchmark survey rated the pressure they’re receiving from senior executives and the board as very high. But is the money flowing for talent and data management?
Data standardization is the ‘trust accelerator’ for broader AI adoption
In this guest column, data product managers at Fitch Solutions explain AI’s impact on credit and investment risk management.
As AI pressures mount, banks split on how to handle staffing
Benchmarking: Over the next 12 months, almost a third of G-Sib respondents said they plan to decrease headcount in their data function.
Everyone wants to tokenize the assets. What about the data?
The IMD Wrap: With exchanges moving market data on-chain, Wei-Shen believes there’s a need to standardize licensing agreements.
FIX Trading Community recommends data practices for European CTs
The industry association has published practices and workflows using FIX messaging standards for the upcoming EU consolidated tapes.