Barclays, Credit Suisse Acquiesce to SEC Dark Pool Settlements
Barclays and Credit Suisse agree to pay $70 million and $84.3 million, respectively, to settle cases of misrepresentation of dark pool operations.

Both Barclays and Credit Suisse were charged with misleading investors over how the banks' respective dark pool trading venues operated. Barclays has agreed to pay $35 million to both the SEC and the New York Attorney General (NYAG), while Credit Suisse will pay $30 million to the SEC, $30 million to the NYAG, and $24.3 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest to the SEC for a total of $84.3 million.
The SEC's charge against Barclays was focused on the bank's failure to police its dark pool through a feature called "Liquidity Profiling", which was meant to police order flow in its LX dark pool, while the bank ran weekly surveillance for toxic order flow. The SEC found that Barclays neither ran surveillance or used the Liquidity Profiling tool, and also has over-ridden the feature by moving some subscribers from the most aggressive categories to the least aggressive, without informing investors.
"Barclays misrepresented its efforts to police its dark pool, overrode its surveillance tool, and misled its subscribers about data feeds at the very time that data feeds were an intense topic of interest," said Robert Cohen, co-chief of the SEC's Market Abuse Unit.
Credit Suisse, meanwhile, was charged with misrepresenting that its Crossfinder dark pool utilized a feature called Alpha Scoring to characterize subscriber order flow monthly in an objective and transparent manner.
In its charge, the SEC said that Alpha Scoring included "significant subjective elements, was not transparent, and did not categorize all subscribers on a monthly basis" and that Credit Suisse "misrepresented that it would use Alpha Scoring to identify 'opportunistic' traders and kick them out of its electronic communications network, Light Pool. In fact, Alpha scoring was not used for the first year that Light Pool was operational."
In December last year, three of JPMorgan's Hong Kong-based equities businesses were fined a collective $30 million by the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) for failing to properly implement its dark pool trading venue.
More on Regulation
SEC pulls rulemaking proposals in bid for course correction
The regulator withdrew 14 Gensler-era proposals, including the controversial predictive data analytics proposal.
Trading venues seen as easiest targets for Esma supervision
Platforms do not pose systemic risks for member states and are already subject to consistent rules.
The Consolidated Audit Trail faces an uncertain fate—yet again
Waters Wrap: The CAT is up and running, but with a conservative SEC in place and renewed pressure from politicians and exchanges, Anthony says the controversial database faces a death by a thousand cuts.
Exchanges plead with SEC to trim CAT reporting requirements
Letters from Cboe, Nasdaq and NYSE ask that the new Atkins administration reduce the amount of data required for the Consolidated Audit Trail, and scrap options data collection entirely.
EU banks want the cloud closer to home amid tariff wars
Fears over US executive orders have prompted new approaches to critical third-party risk management.
Friendly fire? Nasdaq squeezes MTF competitors with steep fee increase
The stock exchange almost tripled the prices of some datasets for multilateral trading facilities, with sources saying the move is the latest effort by exchanges to offset declining trading revenues.
Europe is counting its vendors—and souring on US tech
Under DORA, every financial company with business in the EU must report use of their critical vendors. Deadlines vary, but the message doesn’t: The EU is taking stock of technology dependencies, especially upon US providers.
Regulators can’t dodge DOGE, but can they still get by?
The Waters Wrap: With Trump and DOGE nipping at regulators’ heels, what might become of the CAT, the FDTA, or vendor-operated SEFs?