Buy side slams vendor pre-trade models after April volatility shock

By

-

May 16, 2025

Sam Vaughan-Jones, senior equity dealer, Royal London Asset Management

The advice of pre-trade models should be taken with a hefty grain of salt, according to speakers at this year’s TradeTech – particularly during times of volatility, where prior trade performances will not necessarily repeat themselves.

“Pre-trade models are crucial, but they should be an indication rather than absolute answers,” said Sam Vaughan-Jones, senior equity dealer at Royal London Asset Management.

Danielle Fregeau, global equity trader, Impax Asset Management

In volatile conditions, the performances of historical trades are not reliable indicators of future outcomes. While pre-trade models can be tweaked, Danielle Fregeau, global equity trader at Impax Asset Management, stated that she pivots away from pre-trade analytics in volatile conditions. “It’s hard to get them adapted quickly,” she noted. “To lean on those models is a comfort, but you have to take them with a grain of salt. They could lead you down a trickier path.”

“The models go out the window when volatility is high,” Vaughan-Jones agreed. While their insights are not entirely ignored, traders’ situation-specific decisions are more highly valued.

Beyond unexpected market conditions, pre-trade models can also be destabilised by a lack of, or inconsistencies in, the data they run on.

“We cannot get real-time fills from one of the brokers we are currently using,” Fregeau said, something “critical” on the high-touch desk. “That kills our post-trade processes and means that we have to be very manual. Then, we cannot feed the results into a pre-trade model.”

Similarly hampering efficiency are inconsistent tagging processes across firms.

“There are differences across the buy side as to how the portfolio manager can convey instructions to traders, and then to the counterparty. We’re miles away from having a standardised approach that would facilitate harmonised transaction cost analysis,” noted Benjamin Mahe, head of high-touch trading at AXA Investment Managers.

In turn, this makes it difficult to create more comprehensive pre-trade models.

“You have to work with the data you have,” Fregeau said. “It’s hard to replicate a trade on a given day – you have to think about expectations for the trade, then look back and reassess.”

While AI and large language models (LLMs) are an inescapable talking point across the industry, Vaughan-Jones assured: “we wouldn’t use them in our pre-trade models.” LLMs may be used as a guide, but during volatility trust in these programmes declines.

“We’re not using AI in pre or post trade,” he continued. “AI is a reason that markets have become more efficient, but it has also increased volatility.”

Fregeau was more optimistic towards LLM use, stating that Impax uses the technology in third-party cost models to establish expected costs and measure how executions perform

Kevin O'Connor, global head of analytics, Virtu — Kevin O’Connor, global head of analytics, Virtu

against that.

From a vendor perspective, Kevin O’Connor, global head of analytics at Virtu, agreed that pre-trade models should be seen as decision-support tools rather than predictive models and called for a change of mindset around the technology.

Panelists did not comment on the particular vendors they used for pre-trade models.

Whether vendor or client, the industry agrees that pre-trade models are advisory rather than prescriptive. While technology and data analytics are developing at pace, they are far from being able to predict the future.

PISCES will reduce ‘cliff edges’ – FCA’s Relleen

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 16, 2025

Jon Relleen, director of infrastructure and exchanges, supervision, policy and competition for markets, Financial Conduct Authority

The UK Government has established the legal framework for the Private Intermittent Securities and Capital Exchange System (PISCES) stock market system.

Stock markets will be able to launch Private Intermittent Securities and Capital Exchange System (PISCES) platforms “in the coming months, with shares likely to be traded in the Autumn,” the Treasury stated.

Through PISCES, which allows for the intermittent trading of private company shares, UK authorities aim to provide more liquidity to early-stage companies and increase capital market engagement.

Speaking at TradeTech on 14 May, Jon Relleen, director of infrastructure and exchanges, supervision, policy and competition for markets at the Financial Conduct Authority, discussed the introduction of PISCES amid the growth of private markets.

“Increased activity in private markets has been helpful. Lots of money has been flowing through to companies. We don’t want to see it as a competition between public and private markets. What we ultimately care about is the ability for companies to raise funds, promote growth and innovation, and invest.”

Earlier this year, a report from New Financial and HSBC noted that more than US$1 trillion had been lost to private markets within the last decade.

“We’re very conscious that we don’t want these kinds of cliff edges between public and private markets. PISCES has been about reducing that. We understand there is a demand for a regulated marketplace around some second market transactions in the private space.”

Full rules will be published by the FCA once legislation comes into force.

Employees who have share options in their company through an enterprise management incentive (EMI) or company share option plan (CSOP) will be able to trade their shares on PISCES, Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury James Murray confirmed. Initially proposed in the 2025 Spring Statement, this will allow employees to retain tax advantages.

“[This will] boost the attractiveness of the product to high growth companies looking to expand,” noted Emma Reynolds, economic secretary to the Treasury.

Julia Hoggett, CEO of the London Stock Exchange, which developed PISCES, commented: “We look forward to launching our Private Securities Market, utilising the PISCES framework. This will provide private companies and their shareholders with further options to access liquidity, and investors the opportunity to invest in a broad range of high-growth private companies.”

PISCES transactions will also be exempt from stamp duty and stamp duty reserve tax, as confirmed in the 2024 Autumn Budget.

“These are important milestones in delivering the Government’s plan to go further and faster to drive economic growth through the Plan for Change, by supporting private companies to scale and grow, by providing a stepping stone to public markets, and supporting our world leading capital markets,” Murray concluded.

Pham: “CFTC engaged in willful and bad faith conduct”

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 16, 2025

Acting chairman Caroline Pham has criticised the CFTC’s inaction when concerns were raised about the commission’s handling of the Traders Global Group case.

In August 2023, the CFTC filed a complaint against Candadian FX broker Traders Group Global, also known as My Forex Funds, noting that CA$31.5 million had been transferred to an unidentified account belonging to CEO Murtuza Kazmi between December 2022 and April 2023. These funds were, in reality, tax payments to the Canadian tax authorities.

This week the case was dismissed, with the court’s report stating: “The CFTC, as one of the primary prudential regulators in the United States, has an obligation to discharge all of its obligations – statutory, regulatory, and ethical – faithfully. It also unquestionably has a duty of candour to the Court. However, at almost every stage in this case, the CFTC failed in this regard.”

On the announcement Pham said: “The CFTC engaged in willful and bad faith conduct by making multiple false statements to the Court and other ‘numerous instances of sanctionable behavior’ over the course of a year. This is inexcusable.”

She went on to criticise previous CFTC management, stating: “I first raised numerous concerns about CFTC conduct in this case nearly two years ago – even before the complaint was filed, and again during the litigation when I reviewed CFTC emails evidencing management efforts to conceal the false statements from the Court.

“The CFTC not only disregarded my serious concerns and an oversight letter from a member of Congress, but also engaged in a malicious campaign of retaliation and defamation designed to impugn my character and integrity.”

Pham drew attention to recent changes she has made in the Division of Enforcement since being appointed acting chairman in January, including the introduction of public guidelines to encourage self reporting, new policies to reduce regulation by prosecution, and a redistribution of resources to tackle more serious cases.

“I also want to commend our new Director of Enforcement, Brian Young, for taking immediate and proactive steps to promote an ethical culture and enhance continuing education and training opportunities for our enforcement staff to make sure this conduct never happens again, and the CFTC adheres to the highest standards,” Pham added.

“The CFTC must now accept accountability so that appropriate corrective action can finally be taken to address the conduct issues, and the CFTC can put this behind us and move forward to restore the agency’s credibility and reputation.”

Clarity needed around Europe’s SFT T+1 exemption

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 16, 2025

Franck Noel, head of strategy, risk and transactions, Deloitte

EU member states accepted the European Council’s proposal for the shortened settlement cycle on 7 May, with the amendment that securities financing transactions will be exempt. These transactions are non-standardised, and introducing an obligation to clear on a T+1 basis may be unfeasible, the Council agreed.

Franck Noel, managing director in the strategy, risk and transactions department at Deloitte, told Global Trading: “Whether this exemption will significantly change the workload remains uncertain. SFTs are often tied to bond ownership, meaning that if institutions use SFTs on their assets, they will still need to review their processes and value chain to ensure compliance with T+1 settlement requirements. Additionally, recall procedures will need to be accelerated to accommodate the shorter settlement cycle.”

The exemption is something that has been widely requested by market participants, he said. SFTs typically settle on a shorter timeline than their underlying trades, he said, and require greater flexibility in a T+1 landscape. Additionally, the fact that SFTs are not explicitly excluded from the Central Securities Depositories Regulation (CSDR) could lead to confusion.

In its statement, the council clarified: “The exemption only applied to SFTs documented as single transactions composed of two linked operations.”

Europe will move to a T+1 settlement cycle on 11 October 2027, following negotiations between the European Council and the European Parliament. The transition date was initially recommended by ESMA last November.

The UK announced an 11 October go-live for T+1 earlier this year.

In its report to the UK Government, the Accelerated Settlement Technical Group recommended that SFTs be made exempt from T+1 requirements and called for greater legal and regulatory clarity around the instruments.

“There is a significant share of SFTs that are executed for a settlement date later than the standard settlement cycle, a trend that is expected to increase in both repo and securities lending markets. Restricting the ability of UK trading venues to offer participants the possibility to execute these transactions would risk driving this activity away from those venues.

“The current scope of UK CSDR in relation to SFTs is ambiguous and this has caused confusion and regulatory uncertainty in the context of the move to T+2. The transition to T+1 provides an opportunity to rectify the situation by providing clarity and legal certainty in relation to the treatment of SFTs, especially as SFT markets are becoming increasingly electronic.”

In recent years, numerous concerns have been raised about the feasibility of Europe moving to a T+1 environment.

“Compared to a year ago, we’ve seen a complete shift. Now, there is no room for hesitation,” Noel said.

“In my view, the main changes have been a clear political commitment to making this transition happen in Europe, regardless of challenges, and the agreement on a common implementation date with the UK and Switzerland, which was widely expected by the market.”

“I still believe the transition presents significant challenges for all stakeholders, such as operational processes adjustments (like accelerated affirmation and the need to revamp settlement processes with more automation), liquidity issues, cross-border trades, ETF and securities lending impacts and more. But now the deadline is set, so we need to move forward on a full analysis of these complexities involved by the fragmentation of the European market and the necessary adjustments to the multiple post-trade infrastructures across the region.”

On the announcement, Andrzej Domanski, Polish minister for finance, suggested that a move to T+1 will support the European Union’s broader goals.

“A shorter settlement cycle of one day will make our capital markets more efficient. This is a concrete step to give heed to the calls to boost the EU’s competitiveness,” he said.

Improving European competitiveness is a priority of the union, particularly following the Draghi and Letta reports published in 2024. Other efforts made in this space include the simplification of listing in European markets and the introduction of the savings and investments union (SIU), designed to incentivise retail investment in the region.

While the move to T+1 will close the gap with the US market, Noel does not believe that a shortened settlement cycle will particularly help achieve this goal.

“Since T+1 is becoming a mandatory feature rather than a competitive advantage, it won’t necessarily provide an edge—but not adopting it would be a disadvantage,” he noted. “By realigning settlement cycles Europe will benefit from reduced counterparty risk exposure, enhancing market stability, and improved liquidity, as investors will access funds more quickly.”

“Only the regulatory deadline provides the necessary incentive to ensure timely execution. So, now that we have a common date In Europe, we must plan and assess in 2025, implement in 2026, and test in 2027 to ensure a smooth transition,” Noel concluded.

ELPs, SIs provide valuable role in market, buyside traders say

By

Etienne Mercuriali

-

May 15, 2025

Large technologically-powered market makers are increasingly visible in equity markets, and buyside participants praised the liquidity they provide.

Emerging from their secretive prop trading roots, large market making firms have joined the mainstream, either as electronic liquidity providers (ELPs) or systematic internalisers (SIs), according to buyside panellists at TradeTech Europe.

“SIs just offer something that probably some dark multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) do not offer”, said Fabien Oreve, head of trading at Candriam Asset Management. “It’s just immediacy of execution. Sometimes we need to trade as an emergency and SIs offer that liquidity immediately”.

Fabien Oreve, head of trading at Candriam Asset management

Buyside stakeholders at Tradetech lined up to confirm that the liquidity is both genuine and welcome.

Mike  Poole, head of trading at Jupiter Asset Management said, “If you choose the right venue for the right order, counterparty selection and toolbox breadth matter more than any single market‑share statistic.”

Fellow panellist Kavel Patel of BMO Capital Markets supplied further arguments: “Client analytics now show investors will trade on lit books, periodic auctions or SIs so long as price impact is low.”

Anish Puaar head of market structure at Optiver

The panel noted that seven large, non‑bank electronic market‑makers dominate EU equity liquidity provision.

Matt Clarke, head of EMEA distribution at XTX Markets, said, “High infrastructure and capital costs will deter new entrants.”

He noted that the issue is scale, not oligopoly.

“Two sophisticated parties willing to trade define true price; everything else references that,” he said.

Clarke argued that for liquid megacaps the system can tolerate sizeable off‑book prints, whereas thin small‑caps “really do suffer” if on‑exchange volume halves.

The debate also focused on transparency and operations. Anish Puaar, European head of market structure at Optiver reminded regulators that his firm hedges bilateral risk “via correlated stocks, futures, options; that activity returns to screen markets,” warning that blunt caps on bilateral trading could “backfire if they ignore execution quality.”
He also suggested further academic research should take place to uncover the potential impacts of market maker activity on the market.

Buyside delegates, for their part, asked for better post‑trade flags rather than hard venue quotas, a plea repeated by several speakers across the two panels.

For now, the verdict from Europe’s largest asset managers like Candriam and Jupiter is clear: the liquidity SIs and ELPs deliver is visible, addressable and often decisive—especially in stressed markets. Whether that remains compatible with healthy price discovery, panellists agreed, depends less on market‑makers growing dominance than on sharpening pre and post trade data.

Matt Clarke, head of EMEA distribution at XTX Markets

Clarke stressed that systematic‑internaliser (SI) activity is large but anything but secret.

“We rely on lit exchanges for price formation, but bilateral SI flow is exploding — north of €1 billion a day for us,” he said, adding that the venue’s curated streams let traders show size privately without distorting the screen — “block opportunities I can’t show on lit books.”

Market makers insisted that it was all part of a virtuous circle where they could absorb risk across their balance sheets.

According to Optiver’s Puaar, “What we do bilaterally doesn’t affect our on-screen strategies. They’re two distinct things. When we trade bilaterally, the liquidity doesn’t specifically disappear into thin air. We have to manage that position, unwind that risk. That that means for us is that we’ll trade out a position using correlated assets, using the stock itself. We’ll skew our option pricing we’ll provide liquidity and ETFs as necessary. So there’s still a large element of on screen trading related to our bilateral trading”.

Public market liquidity hampering IPO appetite, industry warns

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 15, 2025

European IPOs and engagement with EU and UK public markets have floundered in recent years. However, unpredictability in the US and the purported end of US exceptionalism have left many keen to rebalance their investments – providing an opportunity for Europe to claw its way back onto the world stage.

A common buyside view is that public listings are unattractive. “European companies want to stay private because when they go public, their valuations go down,” said Muriel Faure, chair of the Technological Innovations Commission at French buy-side body Association Francaise de la Gestions d’Actifs (AFG). Venture capital and private equity firms are able to offer appealing liquidity and funding to companies, which disappears when they IPO.

Bjorn Sibbern_CEO_SIX — Bjorn Sibbern, CEO, SIX.

A recent report from New Financial and HSBC referenced by panellists observed that more than US$1 trillion was lost from public markets in the last decade as companies were bought up by privately held or private equity firms.

Bjorn Sibbern, CEO of SIX Group, dismissed fears that European IPOs are being lost to the US – observing that the two largest IPOs of 2024 were listed on Swiss and Spanish exchanges.

The London Stock Exchange’s Ayuna Nechaeva, head of Europe primary markets, countered the idea that firms are disadvantaged when they go public in the UK and Europe. “Firms go public to gain access to ongoing liquidity and continue their capital raising,” she commented.

The role of retail investors in driving IPO engagement was according to Sibbern, citing his previous role at Nasdaq Nordics. “Retail investors need to be part of the listing process because then you get a flywheel effect. That’s what we learned in Sweden,” he said, which has seen IPO growth over recent years.

Nechaeva commented that investor participation should be encouraged at the point of IPOs. Changes to the listing act in the UK are driving interest in IPOs, she added, and highlighted the PISCES initiative – which allows firms to intermittently access public capital.

PISCES was also referenced by Jon Relleen, director of infrastructure and exchanges, supervision, policy and competition for markets at the Financial Conduct Authority, along with other UK initiatives to draw companies back to UK public markets.

“We need to be careful that we’re not overly negative. London and the UK are really thriving in many asset classes, particularly fixed income,” he commented. “We’ve had lots of reviews on this, and it’s a big focus with the current government. We’ve changed the listing rules, and we’re reforming the prospectus regime. The EU is doing something similar. We’re listening to market participants about where they see frictions and working to reduce that.”

He was careful to add that private markets do have a role to play in the market. “We don’t want to see it as a competition between public and private markets,” he noted. “Ultimately, we care about the ability for companies in a real economy to raise capital, to drive growth and innovation. Companies should face different options in how to go public.”

Simon McQuoid-Mason, head of equity product and quant research at SIX Swiss Exchange, added that Europe has a number of selling points for companies wanting to go public. “The diversity of the region brings new ideas,” he commented. “There’s decentralised capital, as a contrast to the concentration in the US. The challenge is pulling together and providing access to that capital pool.”

“We need more razzmatazz in Europe,” said Simon Gallagher, CEO of Euronext London and head of global sales. “We’re stuck in a doom loop at the moment with the slow pace of IPOs.” Just how to bring the sparkle back to public markets will take a combination of regulatory, structural and mindset adjustments, panellists agreed.

On further incentivising IPOs, Faure floated the idea of digital IPO platforms and tokenised IPOs to make it easier for companies to go public. On a regulatory basis, “there is an opportunity to make the process simple and quick”, she said. “Europe needs to work towards having less CSD and exchange fragmentation, more interoperability, and a change of mindset.”

Unlocking retail the key to fixing European equity markets, industry figures say

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 15, 2025

After years of enviously looking at the US, panellists at TradeTech urgently called for changes to tax rules and investor education, to unleash a wall of retail equity flow.

Panellists at this year’s TradeTech Europe conference called for an end to over-protective regulation of retail. “One of the things that I often hear is that retail should only be playing trading simple products, and that they weren’t sophisticated enough”, said Emma Lokko, head of European market structure for market maker Susquehanna. “I think it’s really important that self-directed retail investors should be allowed to trade what financial instruments they see it is appropriate for them, given their risk appetite and their hedging requirements”

Others put forward a series of changes that should be made to European markets to encourage greater retail investment – something which is already on the rise, according to Emilie Rieupeyroux, head of market strategy, for cash equity and data services at Euronext.

She noted that retail weight on the platform has increased by 20% in the last two years, with the number of end retail investors monitoring the firm’s market data feeds doubling each year for the past four years. Recent volatility has further boosted retail interest in European stocks as confidence in the US market has become shaky, Rieupeyroux added.

Huw Gronow, head of dealing at Newton Investment Management, prioritised the need for education, advocating for personal finance to be added to the national curriculum. He also suggested that industry, government and regulatory bodies bring in incentives to encourage retail participation. “Anything that encourages an investment culture is good,” he said.

Elsewhere, changes to tax programmes were strongly advocated for. Alex Dalley, head of European cash equities at Cboe Europe , called for a European tax-efficient savings product to be mandated, while transaction exemption tax and the elimination of stamp tax – which has already been introduced in the UK and Switzerland – were suggested by Rupert Fennelly, EU head of equities electronic trading and sales at Barclays.

Although retail interest is growing, overprotective regulation and a lack of incentives are still preventing retail investors from fully engaging in the equity markets, panellists said, a discouragement of risk-taking behaviour driven by post-2008 regulations.

“You can’t protect everyone,” argued Simon Gallagher, CEO of Euronext London and head of global sales. “you have to accept that 1/10 investors will lose. Regulators need to let that happen. We need to bring more risk into the system.”

Batting away responsibility, Jon Relleen, director of infrastructure and exchanges, supervision, policy and competition for markets at the Financial Conduct Authority suggested that encouraging risk is not just the role of regulators – tax regimes and exemptions need to be taken into account, along with listing rules and the prospectus regime for companies going public in European markets. Governments and exchanges also have a role to play.

“We need to give people the right kind of advice, encourage them to take those risks. That’s a difficult thing to do. Regulation is not a single bullet – we need to look at this holistically, bringing in market venues and the sell side,” he said.

Fennelly agreed here, arguing that governments don’t need to bring in reforms, but instead must push for a more pro-investment culture. He drew attention to the public float of British Gas in the 1980s, and advocated for a similar, sustained campaign to change the current landscape.

While confidence in the US markets is not quite as strong as it was last year, Robert Miller, head of market structure and liquidity solutions at KCx, observed that the reduction of friction when investing cross-border means that European investors are still more likely to invest in household-name US stocks than domestic. The tendency to ‘outsour

ce’ retail investment to pension funds and the like in Europe, Simon McQuoid-Mason, head of equity product and quant research at SIX Swiss Exchange, added, means that end retail clients are not familiar with successful domestic companies.

In countries like the US and China, where pensions are not provided by the state, the general public are incentivised to invest in equity markets –

doing so is a cultural norm, and not doing so could result in a lack of security later in life.

Relleen advocated for a more US-type structure to be adopted, with a reduction in investor protections – to a safe degree.

Without a major cultural change in attitudes to retail investment, along with structural changes to support them, retail investment may stagnate.

BNY breaches VaR limit, appoints new trading head

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 14, 2025

Daniel Ciment has been named Americas head of equities trading and execution at BNY amid a restructuring of the division.

Based in New York, he reports to Rob Lynch head of fixed income and equities.

John Goodheart, who held the role on an interim basis, will remain global head of fixed income and equities product.

The appointment follows the news that BNY exceeded the value at risk (VaR) threshold of its overall portfolio on a single day in the first three months of 2025, with a daily trading loss greater than US$3.2 million.

BNY did not comment on the loss.

The firm exceeded VaR once in 2024, in the final quarter of the year.

Ciment has 30 years of industry experience, holding senior roles including president and chief operating officer of Elwood Technologies, chief operating officer of IEX Exchange and global head of equities electronic trading at JP Morgan during his career. He has been a freelance electronic trading consultant for the past year.

Citadel Securities calls for Dodd-Frank component rollback

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 12, 2025

Citadel Securities has called for more scrutiny around market data fees, arguing that costs are currently “excessive”.

The company states that market data fees, which make up a large proportion of exchanges’ revenues, are inflated. This increases the barrier to entry for smaller broker-dealers, increases costs for investors and ultimately misaligns with fairness requirements in the Exchange Act, it says.

Under the Exchange Act, modified by the Dodd-Frank Act, member fee changes can be established with immediate effect once self-regulatory organisation (SRO) documents are filed. These filings do not have to be approved by the SEC to become active, and exchanges can retract and refile repeatedly until they collect the relevant fee, Citadel Securities says.

The Dodd-Frank modification should be rescinded, Citadel Securities argues, as it allows exchanges to file fee changes with impunity and without oversight.

The company’s complaint echoes the report from Market Structure Partners on data costs in Europe earlier this year.

Filings from US exchanges illustrate the growing profits being made from market data fees.

In the first three months of 2025, revenues for Nasdaq’s data and listing service was up 3% year-on-year (YoY) to US$192 million. At ICE, data and network technology revenues were US$172 million – up 6%. Cboe reported “a decline in industry market data fees” for its North American equities business in the first quarter, but reported the greatest revenue increase of the three exchanges – an 8% YoY gain, reaching US$77.8 million in market data fee revenues over Q1 2025.

24-hour trading day ends at 8pm, SIPs say—Citadel issues warnings

By

Lucy Carter

-

May 12, 2025

Jeff Kimsey, chairman, SIPs Operating Committees

The pieces are falling into place for the US to move to 24-hour trading as major industry bodies prepare for the move. However, Citadel Securities has called on the SEC to introduce more consistent rules around the new operating structure.

Earlier this month, the transaction securities information processors (SIPs) Operating Committees announced that it plans to extend its operating hours to a 24-hour model. A ‘technical pause’ of less than an hour has been built into each 24-hour cycle, allowing all involved parties to refresh their systems at 8pm ET. As such, a new trading day will begin at 9pm ET – 2am in the UK.

Once submitted to the SEC, plans for the amendment will be accepted or rejected within 300 days.

In a recent letter to the SEC, Citadel Securities stressed that a number of regulatory and infrastructural issues need to be addressed before 24-hour trading can be effective. For the former, “handling requirements, execution quality disclosures and volatility controls must be clear, fit for purpose and consistent across venues,” it says.

On the infrastructure side, key players such as the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation’s (DTCC) National Securities Clearing Corporation (NSCC) and services including SIPs and transaction reporting facilities must be reliably available during trading hours.

SIPs have highlighted three prerequisites for their extended hours to be adopted. The first of these, for DTCC to offer clearing over the 24-hour cycle, are already in motion. Earlier this year, the group announced that 24/5 clearing for the NSCC would be effective from Q2 2026.

Additionally, SIPs says, processors must be technically able to disseminate all quotes and trades during the operating hours. The group intends to ask the SEC whether the extension of trade reporting facility operating hours to allow this will be a prerequisite for its 24-hour model.

Finally, the group states that the listing markets must be able to support the 24-hour model as processors will need to change symbol directory messages.

Jeff Kimsey, chairman of the SIP Operating Committees, commented: “We know the industry is eager to move toward 24-hour trading, and the SIPs are determined to make the changes necessary to make available the market data that will facilitate that.”

Dates for the 24-hour implementation will be determined once regulatory and technical requirements have been met.

Citadel Securities also emphasised the need for trade date and settlement date assignments during overnight sessions to be consistent across the market.

The SIPs Operating Committees, Cboe and NYSE declined to comment on Citadel Securities’ statements.

The drive for institutional 24-hour trading is in part the result of growing competition from retail brokers like Robinhood and Interactive Brokers, which allow clients to access US stocks on a 24/5 basis, and a comfort with 24/7 cryptocurrency trading. International investors are also keen to access the US equity market outside of standard trading hours.

READ MORE: Stocks around the clock

In recent months, Cboe, NYSE and Nasdaq have all announced plans to extend their trading hours. Challenger exchanges like 24X National Exchange have built themselves with 24-hour trading in mind.

.cls-8{fill:#fff;stroke-width:0px;}

The advice of pre-trade models should be taken with a hefty grain of salt, according to speakers at this year’s TradeTech – particularly during times of volatility, where prior trade performances will not necessarily repeat themselves.

The UK Government has established the legal framework for the Private Intermittent Securities and Capital Exchange System (PISCES) stock market system.

Acting chairman Caroline Pham has criticised the CFTC’s inaction when concerns were raised about the commission’s handling of the Traders Global Group case.

Large technologically-powered market makers are increasingly visible in equity markets, and buyside participants praised the liquidity they provide.

After years of enviously looking at the US, panellists at TradeTech urgently called for changes to tax rules and investor education, to unleash a wall of retail equity flow.

Daniel Ciment has been named Americas head of equities trading and execution at BNY amid a restructuring of the division.

Citadel Securities has called for more scrutiny around market data fees, arguing that costs are currently “excessive”.

The pieces are falling into place for the US to move to 24-hour trading as major industry bodies prepare for the move. However, Citadel Securities has called on the SEC to introduce more consistent rules around the new operating structure.

.cls-8{fill:#fff;stroke-width:0px;}