The Mojaloop Foundation today announced the appointment of Jean Bosco lyacu as Chief Executive Officer, effective June 1st 2026. He succeeds Paula Hunter, who will retire. She will transition out of the Executive Director role during the leadership handover. Based in Kigali, Rwanda, Jean Bosco brings more than 15 years of experience in inclusive financial systems, digital finance and Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), to enable the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Market Systems Development. His appointment reflects the Mojaloop Foundation’s continued commitment to advancing inclusive, real-time payment systems globally, with a strong focus on markets where access to financial services remains limited. Jean Bosco will focus on strengthening the Mojaloop Foundation’s long-term sustainability, securing additional funding and supporting successful deployments across its global footprint. The organization continues to support initiatives in multiple regions, working closely with governments, central banks and ecosystem partners to enable inclusive instant payment systems. Jean Bosco lyacu said: “Inclusive finance is one of the defining challenges and opportunities of our time. Mojaloop has already demonstrated the power of open, interoperable infrastructure to transform economies and improve lives. I’m excited to build on this momentum, working with partners around the world to expand access to inclusive digital financial services and ensure long-term sustainability for the organization.” Kosta Peric, Chairperson of the Mojaloop Foundation, commented: “Jean Bosco brings an exceptional combination of regional insight, leadership experience and deep understanding of Digital Public Infrastructure. This marks an important step in Mojaloop’s evolution as we continue to scale our global impact.” Jean Bosco currently serves as Chief Executive Officer of Access to Finance Rwanda (AFR) where he leads a 40 plus-person organization. He has mobilized substantial donor funding for AFR over the past five years and has tremendously expanded AFR’s scope of interventions. He also serves as Chair of the Financial Sector Deepening (FSD) Network Council, coordinating collaboration across nine African markets, and is a member of the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP) FinEquity Technical Advisory Committee. In addition, he holds board roles within the private sector, including at Salvo Grima Africa Distribution. About the Mojaloop Foundation The Mojaloop Foundation’s mission is to increase financial inclusion by empowering organizations to create interoperable payment systems that enable digital financial services for all. As a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, the Foundation maintains Mojaloop - its open-source software and community - as public goods to serve global financial inclusion goals. Governments, banks, mobile money providers and other stakeholders can use Mojaloop to build or enhance inclusive real-time payment platforms. For more information, visit: https://mojaloop.io.

Eventus, a leading provider of comprehensive, at-scale trade surveillance and financial risk solutions, and Take Profit Trader (TPT), a leading futures proprietary trading firm, announced that TPT has recently deployed the Eventus Validus platform as its trade surveillance solution to ensure that the 90,000+ active traders it backs align with exchange and regulatory compliance requirements. Take Profit Trader has deployed Validus across its entire trading ecosystem, ensuring every stage of the trader journey, from evaluation to funded accounts to live-market trading, operates under institutional-grade surveillance standards. James Sixsmith, CEO of Take Profit Trader, said: "We wanted to deploy a best-in-class, exchange-trusted surveillance solution for both our simulated and live-trading environments. We need full visibility into what our traders are doing, not only in the context of their own trading, but also how they're behaving with other traders and the market itself. "Our partnership with Eventus helps to ensure we're backing and developing traders who are in alignment with exchange and regulatory compliance standards. The Validus coverage enables us to detect anomalies, unusual patterns, inappropriate behaviors such as wash trading and attempts at market manipulation, and much more. Eventus helps improve our exchange compliance integrity with a robust surveillance software that's used by many of the most recognized names in the financial industry." Take Profit Trader selected Eventus as its trade surveillance provider based on the firm's exchange-trusted reputation, high-accuracy technology and proven track record with some of the most recognized names in financial services. "Take Profit Trader has grown at a rapid pace as futures trading has become increasingly attractive to a broader community," said Travis Schwab, CEO of Eventus. "It's critical that the firm's trade surveillance software can monitor the activity not only of the more than 90,000 active traders today, but potentially hundreds of thousands tomorrow. We've built Validus to scale as our clients grow, and we're honored to meet the evolving needs of Take Profit Trader for its vital compliance program."

Record revenue of $1.9 billion, up 14% Net income and diluted earnings per share both up 20% CME Group Inc. (NASDAQ: CME) today reported financial results for the first quarter of 2026. The company reported revenue of $1.9 billion and operating income of $1.3 billion for the first quarter of 2026. Net income was $1.2 billion and diluted earnings per common share were $3.18. On an adjusted basis, operating income was $1.4 billion, net income was $1.2 billion and diluted earnings per common share were $3.36. Financial results presented on an adjusted basis for the first quarter of 2026 and 2025 exclude certain items, which are detailed in the reconciliation of non-GAAP results.1           "In a world in which risk has become the new normal, 2026 is off to a record-breaking start as clients around the world turn to CME Group's trusted, regulated markets to hedge across asset classes and in all trading environments," said CME Group Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Terry Duffy. "Robust demand for our products drove Q1 average daily volume up 22% to a record 36.2 million contracts, including records in all six asset classes. This exceptional market participation translated directly into record financial performance, with revenue rising 14% and adjusted net income and diluted EPS increasing 20%. Efficiencies provided to our client base also hit a new high in Q1 with over $85 billion in average daily margin savings, and we're very pleased to further extend our FICC cross-margining agreement to end-user clients later this month. Looking ahead, innovation remains central to our growth strategy. We will continue to work closely with our clients as we expand the range of products and services we provide to help them manage risk and pursue opportunities in a rapidly evolving marketplace." 1. A reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial results mentioned to the respective GAAP figures can be found within the Reconciliation of Adjusted Operating Income and Adjusted Net Income and Adjusted Diluted Earnings per Common Share charts at the end of the financial statements. First-quarter 2026 average daily volume (ADV) reached a quarterly all-time high of 36.2 million contracts, up 22% from first-quarter 2025. Non-U.S. ADV was a record 11.4 million contracts, up 30% compared with the same period in 2025, including the highest quarterly ADV across all regions, with APAC up 33% and EMEA up 29%. Clearing and transaction fees revenue for first-quarter 2026 totaled a record $1.5 billion. The total average rate per contract was $0.652. Market data revenue totaled a record $224 million for first-quarter 2026. As of March 31, 2026, the company had $2.6 billion in cash (including $200 million deposited with Fixed Income Clearing Corporation, which is included in other current assets) and $3.4 billion of debt. The company paid dividends during the first quarter of approximately $2.7 billion and repurchased $536 million in CME Group common shares. CME Group will hold a Q&A conference call to discuss first-quarter 2026 results at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time today. A live audio webcast of the Q&A call will be available on the Investor Relations section of CME Group's website at investor.cmegroup.com under Events & Presentations. An archived recording will be available for up to two months after the call. Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements.  These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements. We want to caution you not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Among the factors that might affect our performance are increasing competition by foreign and domestic entities, including increased competition from new entrants into our markets and consolidation of existing entities; our ability to keep pace with rapid technological developments, including our ability to complete the development, implementation and maintenance of the enhanced functionality required by our customers while maintaining reliability and ensuring that such technology is not vulnerable to security risks; our ability to continue introducing innovative and competitive new products and services on a timely, cost-effective basis, including through our electronic trading capabilities, and derive revenues that are commensurate with our efforts and expectations, and our ability to maintain the competitiveness of our existing products and services; our ability to adjust our fixed costs and expenses if our revenues decline; our ability to manage variable costs associated with CME Group's transition to the Google Cloud, and minimize duplicative costs of maintaining both on-premise and Google Cloud environments during the transition; the resilience of our electronic platforms and the soundness of our business continuity and disaster recovery plans, including in the event of cyberattacks and cyberterrorism or as impacted by a failure of or disruption at one of our suppliers; our ability to maintain existing customers at substantially similar trading levels, develop strategic relationships and attract new customers; our ability to expand and globally offer our products and services; changes in regulations, including the impact of any changes in laws or government policies with respect to our products or services or our industry, such as any changes to regulations and policies that require increased financial and operational resources from us or our customers, as well as the impact of tariffs and tax policy changes, restrictions on our ability to offer CME Group products and services in specific geographies or to specific customers or limitations or changes in underlying/physical product flows across geographies; the costs associated with protecting our intellectual property rights and our ability to operate our business without violating the intellectual property rights of others; decreases in revenue from our market data as a result of decreased demand or changes to regulations in various jurisdictions; changes in our rate per contract due to shifts in the mix of the products traded, the trading venue and the mix of customers (whether the customer receives member or non-member fees or participates in one of our various incentive programs) and the impact of our tiered pricing structure; the ability of our credit and liquidity risk management practices to adequately protect us from the credit risks of clearing firms and other counterparties, and to satisfy the margin and liquidity requirements associated with the BrokerTec matched principal business; the ability of our compliance and risk management programs to effectively monitor and manage our risks, including our ability to prevent errors and misconduct and protect our infrastructure against security breaches and misappropriation of our intellectual property assets; our dependence on third-party providers and exposure to risk from third parties, including risks related to the performance, reliability and security of technology used by, or facilities provided by, our third-party providers and third-party providers that our clients and third-parties rely on; our reliance on third-party distribution partners, including independent software vendors, futures commission merchants, introducing brokers, broker-dealers, regulatory reporting and data distributors and platform operators, and other partners, for facilitating trading and for market data information, and potential impacts from changes in their business models and priorities; volatility in commodity, equity and fixed income prices, and price volatility of financial benchmarks and instruments such as interest rates, equity indices, fixed income instruments and foreign exchange rates; economic, social, political and market conditions, including new and existing geopolitical tensions or conflicts, the volatility of the capital and credit markets and the impact of economic conditions on the trading activity of our current and potential customers; our ability to accommodate increases in contract volume and market data and order transaction traffic across the entire trade cycle and the ability to implement enhancements meeting our regulatory obligations and customer needs without failure or degradation of the performance of our trading and clearing systems; our ability to execute our growth strategy and maintain our growth effectively; our ability to manage the risks, control the costs and achieve the synergies associated with our strategy for acquisitions, investments, alliances, strategic partnerships and joint ventures; variances in earnings on cash accounts and collateral that our clearing house holds; impact of CME Group pricing/fee level and structure and incentive changes; impact of aggregation services and internalization on trade flow and volumes; any negative financial impacts from changes to the terms of intellectual property and index rights; our ability to continue to generate funds and/or manage our indebtedness to allow us to continue to invest in our business; industry, channel partner and customer consolidation and/or concentration; decreases in trading and clearing activity; the imposition of a transaction tax or user fee on futures and options transactions and/or repeal of the 60/40 tax treatment of such transactions; increases in effective tax rates, borrowing costs, or changes in tax policy; our ability to maintain our brand and reputation; and the unfavorable resolution of material legal proceedings. For a detailed discussion and additional information concerning these and other factors that might affect our performance, see our other recent periodic filings, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on February 26, 2026, under the caption "Risk Factors". CME Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Consolidated Balance Sheets (in millions) March 31, 2026 December 31, 2025 ASSETS Current Assets: Cash and cash equivalents $                 2,391.2 $                 4,416.9 Marketable securities 124.2 125.0 Accounts receivable, net of allowance 935.5 639.2 Other current assets (includes $6.4 and $6.5 in restricted cash) 515.0 522.1 Performance bonds and guaranty fund contributions 165,035.3 159,656.1 Total current assets 169,001.2 165,359.3 Property, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization 355.4 362.7 Intangible assets—trading products 17,175.3 17,175.3 Intangible assets—other, net 2,550.8 2,610.7 Goodwill 10,506.0 10,514.7 Other assets 2,404.8 2,401.5 Total Assets $             201,993.5 $             198,424.2 LIABILITIES AND EQUITY Current Liabilities: Accounts payable $                      75.4 $                      71.8 Other current liabilities 887.1 568.8 Performance bonds and guaranty fund contributions 165,035.3 159,656.1 Total current liabilities 165,997.8 160,296.7 Long-term debt 3,423.2 3,422.3 Deferred income tax liabilities, net 5,221.1 5,242.2 Other liabilities 733.2 734.8 Total Liabilities 175,375.3 169,696.0 Total CME Group Shareholders' Equity 26,618.2 28,728.2 Total Liabilities and Equity $             201,993.5 $             198,424.2 CME Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Consolidated Statements of Income (dollars in millions, except per share amounts; shares in thousands) Quarter Ended  March 31, 2026 2025 Revenues Clearing and transaction fees $  1,542.6 $  1,337.3 Market data and information services 224.1 194.5 Other 113.4 110.5 Total Revenues 1,880.1 1,642.3 Expenses Compensation and benefits 223.0 206.7 Technology 76.6 65.7 Professional fees and outside services 28.2 28.5 Amortization of purchased intangibles 56.1 55.2 Depreciation and amortization 27.2 27.3 Licensing and other fee agreements 106.8 96.6 Other 52.5 54.3 Total Expenses 570.4 534.3 Operating Income 1,309.7 1,108.0 Non-Operating Income (Expense) Investment income 1,389.3 892.7 Interest and other borrowing costs (43.6) (41.7) Equity in net earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries 102.4 88.2 Other non-operating income (expense) (1,246.9) (802.4) Total Non-Operating Income (Expense) 201.2 136.8 Income before Income Taxes 1,510.9 1,244.8 Income tax provision 356.6 288.6 Net Income $  1,154.3 $     956.2 Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group - Basic(1) $  1,168.0 $     944.2 Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group - Diluted(1) $  1,154.3 $     944.2 Earnings per Share Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group: Basic $       3.25 $       2.63 Diluted 3.18 2.62 Weighted Average Number of Common Shares: Basic 359,318 359,613 Diluted(2) 363,208 360,227 1. The difference between Net Income and Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group - Basic and Diluted is the result of the distribution of earnings allocated to preferred shares. 2. Preferred shares of 4,584,000 were all converted on March 5, 2026 to Class A Common stock and are included in the Diluted shares for the first quarter of 2026. CME Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of Adjusted Operating Income (dollars in millions) Quarter Ended  March 31, 2026 2025 Total Revenues $  1,880.1 $  1,642.3 Adjusted Total Revenues $  1,880.1 $  1,642.3 Total Expenses $     570.4 $     534.3 Restructuring and severance (4.0) (1.1) Deferred compensation(1) 0.8 2.2 Amortization of purchased intangibles (56.1) (55.2) Strategic transaction-related (costs) credits (0.6) — Real estate-related (costs) credits (0.7) — Foreign exchange transaction gains (losses) 0.9 (2.3) Litigation matters or settlements 1.0 (3.3) Adjusted Total Expenses $     511.7 $     474.6 Operating Income $  1,309.7 $  1,108.0 Adjusted Operating Income $  1,368.4 $  1,167.7 1. Includes $0.8 million for a change in our non-qualified deferred compensation liability in the first quarter of 2026. This impact does not affect net income and adjusted net income, because the compensation and benefits change has an equal and offsetting change in investment income. CME Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Reconciliation of Adjusted Net Income and Adjusted Earnings per Common Share (dollars in millions, except per share amounts; shares in thousands) Quarter Ended  March 31, 2026 2025 Net Income $  1,154.3 $     956.2 Restructuring and severance 4.0 1.1 Amortization of purchased intangibles(1) 60.1 68.2 Strategic transaction-related costs (credits)(2) 0.1 — Real estate-related costs (credits) 0.7 — Foreign exchange transaction (gains) losses (0.9) 2.3 Unrealized and realized (gains) losses on investments 22.9 6.5 Litigation matters or settlements (1.0) 3.3 Income tax effect related to above (21.0) (16.1) Other income tax items 0.9 (1.6) Adjusted Net Income $  1,220.1 $  1,019.9 Adjusted Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group -Basic(3) $  1,233.2 $  1,007.1 Adjusted Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group -Diluted(3) $  1,220.1 $  1,007.1 Earnings per Share Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group:      Basic $       3.25 $       2.63      Diluted 3.18 2.62 Adjusted Earnings per Share Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group:      Basic $       3.43 $       2.80      Diluted 3.36 2.80 Weighted Average Number of Common Shares:      Basic 359,318 359,613      Diluted(4) 363,208 360,227 1. Includes $2.6 million of amortization of purchased intangibles at S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC and $1.4 million of amortization of purchased intangibles at FanDuel Prediction Markets Holdings LLC in the first quarter of 2026. This is reported in Equity in net earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries on the Consolidated Statements of Income. 2. The values shown above may differ from what is shown in the Reconciliation of Adjusted Operating Income as that schedule does not include adjustment items or portions of items included in non-operating results. 3. The difference between Adjusted Net Income and Adjusted Net Income Attributable to Common Shareholders of CME Group - Basic and Diluted is the result of the distribution of earnings allocated to preferred shares. 4. Preferred shares of 4,584,000 were all converted on March 5, 2026 to Class A Common stock and are included in the Diluted shares for the first quarter of 2026. CME Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Quarterly Operating Statistics 1Q 2025 2Q 2025 3Q 2025 4Q 2025 1Q 2026 Trading Days 61 62 64 64 61 Quarterly Average Daily Volume (ADV)(1) CME Group ADV (in thousands) Product Line 1Q 2025 2Q 2025 3Q 2025 4Q 2025 1Q 2026 Interest rates 15,029 15,472 13,378 13,010 18,674 Equity indexes 7,997 7,661 6,278 7,738 8,655 Foreign exchange 1,149 1,096 834 853 1,193 Energy 2,903 3,082 2,295 2,523 3,985 Agricultural commodities 1,958 1,964 1,712 1,787 2,042 Metals 732 943 825 1,441 1,682 Total 29,768 30,217 25,322 27,353 36,231 Venue CME Globex 27,732 28,097 23,418 25,542 33,633 Open outcry 881 993 989 816 1,241 Privately negotiated 1,154 1,127 915 995 1,357 Total 29,768 30,217 25,322 27,353 36,231 Quarterly Average Rate Per Contract (RPC)(1) CME Group RPC Product Line 1Q 2025 2Q 2025 3Q 2025 4Q 2025 1Q 2026 Interest rates $          0.476 $          0.481 $          0.487 $          0.486 $          0.457 Equity indexes 0.624 0.635 0.652 0.611 0.597 Foreign exchange 0.762 0.772 0.841 0.847 0.780 Energy 1.222 1.138 1.214 1.245 1.084 Agricultural commodities 1.376 1.435 1.423 1.427 1.344 Metals 1.588 1.456 1.505 1.295 1.153 Average RPC $          0.686 $          0.690 $          0.702 $          0.707 $          0.652 1. ADV and RPC includes futures and options on futures only.

Miami International Holdings, Inc. (MIAX®) (NYSE: MIAX), a technology-driven leader in building and operating regulated financial markets across multiple asset classes, today announced its new nationwide advertising campaign, "Excellence in Every Exchange." The broad-reaching campaign marks a significant milestone in MIAX's marketing strategy to expand brand awareness and deepen engagement across the broader financial ecosystem following its August 2025 initial public offering. "Our new advertising campaign reinforces our commitment to operational excellence across our exchanges and our deep-rooted relationships with customers," said Thomas P. Gallagher, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of MIAX.  "We're excited about the opportunity to share the next chapter of MIAX's growth story and connect with the market in a broader way, especially as we include product-driven messaging that showcases our soon-to-launch Bloomberg equity index futures products." The campaign was developed in-house by MIAX's marketing team and features bold, three-dimensional artwork that conveys a sense of movement, symbolizing the speed of the company's proprietary, state-of-the-art trading technology. MIAX's signature colors represent its multi-asset class portfolio comprised of options, futures, international, and equities exchanges. "Our new campaign sets the stage for the next era of our brand's identity and emphasizes how MIAX maintains the highest standard of quality and professionalism in every interaction," said Kelli Annequin, Chief Marketing Officer of MIAX. "It truly represents our commitment to delivering excellence in every exchange and elevates our brand to a new level." MIAX's multi-channel campaign is live across the U.S. on strategic, high-impact Out-Of-Home placements in major cities and influential financial hubs, as well as in industry-leading media outlets.

The FCA has carried out its first operation with partners to disrupt illegal peer-to-peer crypto trading across multiple London locations. Working with HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and the South West Regional Organised Crime Unit (SWROCU), the FCA targeted 8 premises suspected of illegal peer-to-peer crypto trading. The FCA issued cease and desist letters at each site, notifying traders to stop illegal activity immediately. Evidence obtained during the on-site inspections is supporting a number of ongoing criminal investigations. Peer-to-peer trading is when individuals buy and sell crypto directly with each other, rather than using a centralised exchange and requires appropriate registration. There are currently no FCA registered peer-to-peer crypto traders or platforms operating in the UK. Steve Smart, executive director of enforcement and market oversight at the FCA, said: 'Unregistered peer-to-peer crypto traders operating in the UK are doing so illegally and pose a financial crime risk. We will use our powers and work with partners to disrupt them. 'Consumers should protect themselves by only dealing with firms registered with the FCA and by remembering that crypto remains a high risk investment.' DI Ross Flay of SWROCU said: 'By working with our colleagues at the FCA and HMRC we are able to effectively target and disrupt unregistered peer-to-peer crypto traders operating illegally. As law enforcement, we want to stop these traders providing a route for criminals to move, disguise and spend illegal money.' The FCA has previously taken action against unregistered cryptoasset activity in the UK, including prosecuting an individual operating an illegal network of crypto ATMs. In June 2024, the FCA worked with the Metropolitan Police Service to arrest 2 individuals suspected of running an illegal cryptoasset exchange. The Government’s National Risk Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing outlines how cryptoassets are increasingly used to launder the proceeds of crime. The FCA continues to work with domestic and international partners to fight financial crime and protect consumers. Consumers can check whether a crypto firm is correctly registered with the FCA using the FCA’s Firm Checker. Background Action was taken under the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017. Crypto is a high-risk investment and remains largely unregulated in the UK, except for anti-money laundering and financial promotion. Use the FCA’s Firm Checker to check a firm’s permissions. The FCA enables a fair and thriving financial services market for the good of consumers and the economy. Find out more about the FCA.

Cboe Global Markets, Inc. (Cboe: CBOE), a leading global markets   operator and pioneer in equity derivatives, today announced that it has reached a definitive agreement to sell its Canadian and Australian equities exchanges, Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia, to TMX Group Limited (TMX Group), a leading market operator. The aggregate sale price is $300 million USD. Cboe announced plans in October 2025 to sell its Australian and Canadian equities businesses as part of a strategic realignment to sharpen its strategic focus on core strengths and emerging opportunities aligned with its long-term strategy – positioning the company to lead in a dynamic and evolving global markets landscape. “We are pleased to reach an agreement to sell these businesses to TMX Group, a longstanding and well-established market operator,” said Craig Donohue, Chief Executive Officer of Cboe Global Markets. “The transaction will bring Cboe Australia and Cboe Canada under new ownership well suited to support their next chapter, while enabling Cboe to reallocate resources and capital towards optimizing our core businesses for further growth and profitability, and pursuing opportunities in new and emerging areas.” “This transaction marks an important milestone in our strategic realignment, allowing us to sharpen our focus on the growth opportunities that will position Cboe for long-term success,” said Prashant Bhatia, EVP, Head of Enterprise Strategy & Corporate Development at Cboe Global Markets. “As our industry undergoes rapid transformation – driven by expanding retail participation and rising demand for innovative products, the emergence of event and prediction markets, the accelerating adoption of digital assets and tokenization, and the evolution toward 24x7, on‑chain markets with atomic settlement – we see significant opportunity to build on our strengths and accelerate growth by focusing on areas where we can lead and differentiate.” The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including applicable regulatory approvals. The acquisitions of Cboe Australia and Cboe Canada are expected to close separately, each after required approvals have been obtained. Until the transactions close, Cboe will continue to operate both exchanges as usual. Cboe will work closely with customers, regulators, and other key stakeholders in both jurisdictions to support a smooth and orderly transition. Additionally, Cboe will provide transition services support for a limited time post closing. Cboe will provide an update regarding the potential financial implications of the transaction during its first quarter earnings call taking place on Friday, May 1, 2026. Barclays Capital Inc. is acting as financial advisor to Cboe. Sidley Austin LLP; Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP; and Mallesons are serving as Cboe’s outside legal counsel. 

Transaction will create a global powerhouse for mining finance and reduce complexity and costs for Canadian market participants Acquisition will strengthen TMX's ability to serve clients across the capital markets ecosystem, expands global presence, accelerates growth strategy Analyst webcast and conference call on Wednesday, April 22, 2026 at 8:00am EDT to discuss TMX Group Limited (TMX Group) announced today an agreement to acquire Middlebury Holdings Pty. Limited (Cboe Australia) and Cboe Canada Holdings, ULC (Cboe Canada) from Cboe Global Markets, Inc. for US$300 million ($409 million*) in total consideration, a transaction that will bolster TMX's ability to serve clients across the capital markets ecosystem, expand the company's global presence, and accelerate the company's growth strategy, while reducing cost and complexity for Canadian market participants. "We are tremendously excited to announce the acquisition of Cboe Australia and Cboe Canada, a deal that represents a unique opportunity to strengthen our domestic marketplace for clients and the entire stakeholder ecosystem, while expanding the reach and impact of our presence in a region of the world we know well," said John McKenzie, Chief Executive Officer, TMX Group. "We look forward to working with our industry partners to ensure a smooth transition, and to exploring innovative ways to serve the needs of issuers and investors across the Australian market, while continuing to seek out opportunities to accelerate our enterprise growth strategy." Cboe Australia and Cboe Canada offer equities trading venues, listing venues and market data solutions. Cboe Australia is an innovative securities exchange offering companies strategic tailored support for public market listings, including ETFs, as well as structured products and warrants, and providing a trading venue for brokers and investors with efficient and cost-effective access to local and global investment opportunities. Cboe Australia was also recently granted a license for corporate listings. Cboe Canada includes MATCHNow, NEO-L, NEO-N, and NEO-D, as well as ETF, CDR and corporate listings. "The teams at Cboe Australia and Cboe Canada have delivered consistent performance and built resilient, high-quality markets," said Craig Donohue, Chief Executive Officer, Cboe Global Markets. "These businesses are well positioned for their next chapter, and we will work closely with TMX, our local regulators, and our clients to ensure a seamless transition." Transaction Highlights TMX's acquisition of Cboe Australia will bring together the world's leading mining and energy transition financing ecosystems, unlocking potential to innovate for a growing global client base. TMX's acquisition of Cboe Canada enhances the quality of client experience across domestic equities marketplaces: Increasing efficiency of access to capital and liquidity for Canadian issuers, and Reducing direct and indirect costs for participants, while improving execution quality and resiliency. Transaction expected to be accretive to adjusted earnings per share within the first 12 months of closing, excluding synergies. Revenue growth expected to be in-line with TMX's long-term financial objectives Combined Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia businesses delivered revenue of approximately $87 million in 2025, and adjusted EBITDA of approximately $25 million**. Further Transaction Details The purchase of each business is subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions in Australia and Canada. The two components of this acquisition, Cboe Australia and Cboe Canada, are expected to close separately, each after required approvals have been obtained. Canaccord Genuity and Macquarie Capital are acting as financial advisors to TMX Group. FGS Longview is acting as strategic communications advisor to TMX Group. *Based on USD/CAD exchange rate of 1.3644 at April 21, 2026. Actual amounts in Canadian dollars are subject to change. **Based on average AUD/CAD of 0.90 for 2025. Cboe Australia and Canada revenue and EBITDA are compilations of financial information provided to us for the Cboe entities as of December 31, 2025. The Cboe financial information is unaudited and prepared in accordance with IFRS (Cboe Canada) or Australian Accounting Standards (Cboe Australia) for public companies. Teleconference / Audio Webcast TMX Group will host a teleconference / audio webcast to discuss the transaction. Time: 8:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. ET on Wednesday, April 22, 2026 Participants may access the conference call via the webcast link: https://www.gowebcasting.com/14669. The audio webcast of the conference call and investor presentation will also be available on TMX Group's website at www.tmx.com, under Investor Relations. Alternatively, participants may join the live call by dialing 1-833-752-4317 or 1-647-846-2266. An audio replay of the conference call will be available at 1-855-669-9658 or 1-412-317-0088, [access code 6830744]. Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information This press release of TMX Group Limited ("TMX Group", "us", "we", "our") contains "forward-looking information" (as defined in applicable Canadian securities legislation) that is based on expectations, assumptions, estimates, projections and other factors that management believes to be relevant as of the date of this press release. Often, but not always, such forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as "plans", "expects", "projects", "is expected", "projected", "budget", "scheduled", "targeted", "estimates", "forecasts", "intends", "anticipates", "believes", or variations or the negatives of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would", "might" or "will" be taken, occur or be achieved or not be taken, occur or be achieved. Forward-looking information, by its nature, requires TMX Group to make assumptions and is subject to significant risks and uncertainties which may give rise to the possibility that our expectations or conclusions will not prove to be accurate and that our assumptions may not be correct. Examples of forward-looking information in this press release include, but are not limited to, the anticipated benefits of the transactions to TMX Group, Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia; the expected impact on TMX Group's earnings and Adjusted earnings per share; expectations regarding the revenue growth of Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia; the ability to integrate Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia into TMX Group and the potential synergies; the expected impact on TMX's long-term growth strategy and transformational objectives; the potential for geographic expansion; the ability for TMX Group to accelerate Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia's growth; the timing and receipt of regulatory approval; and closing of the transaction, each of which is subject to a number of significant risks and uncertainties. These risks include, but are not limited to: competition from other exchanges or marketplaces, including alternative trading systems and new technologies, on a national and international basis; dependence on the economies of Canada, the United States and Australia; adverse effects on our results caused by global economic conditions (including geopolitical events, interest rate movements or threats of recession) or uncertainties including changes in business cycles that impact our sector; failure to retain and attract qualified personnel; geopolitical and other factors which could cause business interruption; dependence on information technology; vulnerability of our networks and third party service providers to security risks, including cyber attacks; failure to properly identify or implement our strategies; regulatory constraints; constraints imposed by our level of indebtedness, risks of litigation or other proceedings; dependence on adequate numbers of customers; failure to develop, market or gain acceptance of new products; failure to close and effectively integrate acquisitions, including the Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia acquisition, to achieve planned economics or divest underperforming businesses; currency risk; adverse effect of new business activities; adverse effects from business divestitures; not being able to meet cash requirements because of our holding company structure and restrictions on paying inter-corporate dividends; dependence on third party suppliers and service providers; dependence of trading operations on a small number of clients; risks associated with our clearing operations; challenges related to international expansion; restrictions on ownership of TMX Group common shares; inability to protect our intellectual property; adverse effect of a systemic market event on certain of our businesses; risks associated with the credit of customers; cost structures being largely fixed; the failure to realize cost reductions in the amount or the time frame anticipated; dependence on market activity that cannot be controlled; the regulatory constraints that apply to the business of TMX Group and its regulated subsidiaries, costs of on exchange clearing and depository services, trading volumes (which could be higher or lower than estimated) and the resulting impact on revenues; future levels of revenues being lower than expected or costs being higher than expected. Forward-looking information is based on a number of assumptions which may prove to be incorrect, including, but not limited to, assumptions with respect to the impact of the cost of acquisition financing on adjusted earnings per share; assumptions in connection with the ability of TMX Group to successfully compete against global and regional marketplaces and other venues; business and economic conditions generally; exchange rates (including estimates of exchange rates from Canadian dollars to the U.S. dollar, British pound sterling, or Australian dollar), commodities prices, the level of trading and activity on markets, and particularly the level of trading in TMX Group's key products; business development and marketing and sales activity; the continued availability of financing on appropriate terms for future projects; changes to interest rates and the timing thereof; productivity at TMX Group, as well as that of TMX Group's competitors; market competition; research and development activities; the successful introduction and client acceptance of new products and services; successful introduction of various technology assets and capabilities; the impact on TMX Group and its customers of various regulations; TMX Group's ongoing relations with its employees; and the extent of any labour, equipment or other disruptions at any of its operations of any significance other than any planned maintenance or similar shutdowns. In addition to the assumptions outlined above, forward looking information related to long term revenue CAGR objectives, and long term adjusted earnings per share CAGR objectives are based on assumptions that include, but not limited to: TMX Group's success in achieving growth initiatives and business objectives; continued investment in growth businesses and in transformation initiatives including next generation technology and systems; no significant changes to our effective tax rate, and number of shares outstanding; organic and inorganic growth in recurring revenue moderate levels of market volatility over the long term; level of listings, trading, and clearing consistent with historical activity; economic growth consistent with historical activity; no significant changes in regulations; continued disciplined expense management across our business; continued re-prioritization of investment towards enterprise solutions and new capabilities; free cash flow generation consistent with historical run rate; and a limited impact from inflation, rising interest rates and supply chain constraints on our plans to grow our business over the long term including on the ability of our listed issuers to raise capital. While we anticipate that subsequent events and developments may cause TMX Group's views to change, TMX Group has no intention to update this forward-looking information, except as required by applicable securities law. This forward-looking information should not be relied upon as representing TMX Group's views as of any date subsequent to the date of this press release. TMX Group has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those current expectations described in forward-looking information. However, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended and that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from current expectations. There can be no assurance that forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. These factors are not intended to represent a complete list of the factors that could affect TMX Group. Important additional information identifying risks and uncertainties and other factors is contained in TMX Group's 2025 Annual Report under the headings entitled "Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information" and "Enterprise Risk Management" which may be accessed at tmx.com in the Investor Relations section under Regulatory Filings. Non-GAAP Financial Measures This press release includes references to financial measures that are not defined by GAAP. Although such non-GAAP measures are calculated according to accepted industry practice, such measures disclosed in this press release may be different from non-GAAP measures used by other companies. This data is intended to provide additional information and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. While TMX Group believes these measures provide investors with greater transparency and supplemental data relating to the transaction, readers are cautioned that these non-GAAP measures are not alternatives to measures determined in accordance with GAAP and should not, on their own, be construed as indicators of TMX Group's or Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia's future performance or profitability. Readers should not rely on any single financial measure when evaluating TMX Group's business or that of Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia. We use non-GAAP measures and non-GAAP ratios that do not have standardized meanings prescribed by GAAP and are, therefore, unlikely to be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. Management uses these measures, and excludes certain items, because it believes doing so provides investors a more effective analysis of underlying operating and financial performance, including, in some cases, our ability to generate cash and our ability to repay debt. Management also uses these measures to more effectively measure performance over time, and excluding these items increases comparability across periods. The exclusion of certain items does not imply that they are non-recurring or not useful to investors. Adjusted earnings per share provided above is a non-GAAP ratio and does not have a standardized meaning prescribed by GAAP and is therefore unlikely to be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. TMX Group presents Adjusted EPS and excludes, among other things, acquisition, integration, and related items; amortization of intangibles related to acquisitions; strategic re-alignment expenses; dispute, litigation and related items; and other items as disclosed in TMX Group's 2025 Annual Report. For more information on Adjusted EPS, including definitions and explanations of how these measures provide useful information, refer to Non-GAAP Measures in TMX Group‘s 2025 Annual Report. Adjusted EBITDA is calculated as net income excluding interest expense, income tax expense, depreciation and amortization, acquisition, integration, and related costs, one-time income (loss), and other significant items that are not reflective of the underlying business operations of Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia. Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia Adjusted EBITDA is a compilation of financial information provided to us for Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia entities as of December 31, 2025. The Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia financial information is unaudited and prepared in accordance with IFRS (Cboe Canada) or Australian Accounting Standards (Cboe Australia) for public companies. Adjusted EBITDA for Cboe Canada and Cboe Australia excludes certain items such as discontinued operations, transfer pricing, unrealized gains / losses, and one-time employee costs.

Global financial markets in the first quarter of 2026 were dominated by, a challenging macroeconomic backdrop shaped by geopolitical tensions and a renewed cycle of inflation concerns. Q1 2026 and mainly March 2026 proved to be a turning point, as investors were forced to reassess expectations for monetary easing amid escalating global risks.  Geopolitical conflict triggers energy and inflation shock  The dominant driver of market dynamics in Q1 2026 was the escalating conflict in the Middle East, which evolved into a global energy supply shock by March. Disruptions to energy markets reignited inflation concerns across all economies, reversing the disinflation narrative that had gained traction at the end of last year.  This renewed inflation pressure triggered a sharp sell-off in global bond markets. Bond yields moved higher across the curve as investors adjusted inflation expectations and questioned the timing and extent of future interest rate cuts.  Central banks hold steady markets reprice expectations  Against this backdrop, both the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank opted to keep policy rates unchanged. The Fed held rates at 3.75 percent, while the ECB maintained its policy rate at 2.15 percent. Despite heightened volatility, the ECB noted that inflation remained in a “good place,” signaling confidence in the underlying disinflation trend prior to the energy shock.  However, markets adjusted rapidly. While expectations for Federal Reserve rate cuts had been priced earlier in the quarter, the inflationary implications of the Middle East conflict led investors to reassess that outlook. In contrast, markets began pricing in potential rate hikes from the ECB, reflecting diverging policy expectations between the two central banks.  Bond yields rise across the curve  Bond markets reacted decisively to the renewed inflation narrative. German Bund yields and U.S. Treasury yields rose across the curve, driven by heightened geopolitical risk and concerns over sustained price pressures. The sell-off underscored the sensitivity of fixed income markets to energy-driven inflation shocks and reinforced the importance of geopolitical risk as a macro variable.  Yield curve dynamics reflected these shifts. The 2s10s spread stood at 53 basis points in the United States and 40 basis points in Germany, highlighting a steeper curve as long-term yields moved higher relative to short-term rates.  Peripheral spreads continue to tighten  Despite broader market volatility, euro area peripheral spreads showed resilience. The 10-year BTP vs Bund spread narrowed further, declining to 90 basis points. This tightening suggests continued investor confidence in Italian sovereign debt and reflects strong demand for yield in a higher-rate environment, even as core yields rise.          Rising volatility drives trade size and trading activity in Bund, Bobl, and Schatz  Average trade sizes in Euro-Bund Futures (FGBL), Euro-Bobl Futures (FGBM), and Euro-Schatz Futures (FGBS) stood at 22, 38, and 53 lots, respectively, over the quarter. On a quarter-on-quarter basis, trade sizes were broadly stable, with FGBL and FGBS unchanged and FGBM declining modestly by 6 percent. The resilience in trade sizes highlights sustained market participation despite heightened volatility.  Trading across all tenors was strongly supported by rising yields along the entire curve, as investors repositioned in response to renewed inflation concerns. Median trade sizes for FGBL and FGBM were approximately 4 and 7 lots, respectively, while FGBS trade sizes fluctuated more widely, ranging from 1 to 10 lots. This dispersion reflects a mix of tactical positioning and risk management activity amid rapidly shifting macro conditions.  Trading activity strengthened further in Q1, supported by increased volumes and rising open interest across major rates futures. Eurex volumes rose 18 percent year-on-year across the core long‑term interest rate (LTIR) futures segment. Open interest growth was particularly strong in the German and Italian markets, increasing by 20 percent and 31 percent respectively, while French contracts saw a 27 percent year-on-year increase. Meanwhile, Italian contracts (BTP/BTS) also recorded robust volume growth, underscoring sustained investor engagement amid elevated volatility. Short-end BTS contracts saw open interest decline by 2 percent year-on-year, however, pointing to a rotation toward longer-duration exposure amid elevated volatility.     At the top-of-book level, market depth reached record levels during the quarter. Best bid and offer (BBO) sizes in Bund futures accelerated steadily, peaking at over 1,000 lots, reflecting strong liquidity provision and increased electronic participation. However, this improvement was temporarily disrupted during the Q1 contract roll and periods of heightened geopolitical tension. During these episodes, liquidity conditions tightened noticeably, with top-of-book sizes falling to lows of approximately 190 lots. Elevated risk levels led liquidity providers to adopt a more cautious stance, refraining from immediately replenishing BBO sizes to typical levels.  Despite these fluctuations, liquidity remained resilient and executable. Eurex's posted liquidity continued to translate effectively into tradable depth. Under normal market conditions, the median trade impacted the relevant FGBL BBO side by an average of 1.2 percent. During the roll period and as the Iran conflict escalated, trade impact increased to a still-manageable 3.5 percent, highlighting the market’s ability to absorb risk even amid periods of intensified volatility.  Outlook  Looking ahead, markets remain highly sensitive to developments in geopolitics and energy supply. Inflation dynamics, rather than growth concerns, have reasserted themselves as the dominant driver of monetary policy expectations. While central banks maintain a cautious stance, the Q1 experience highlights how quickly the policy outlook can shift in response to external shocks.  As investors navigate the coming quarters, volatility is likely to remain elevated, with bond markets particularly exposed to changes in inflation expectations and geopolitical risk.  Further information  Fixed Income Futures  Fixed Income Options  Euro-EU Bond Futures (factsheet)

This consultation has concluded Read the full outcome Reforming the Senior Managers & Certification Regime: Consultation Response PDF, 371 KB, 26 pages This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology. Request an accessible format. If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email digital.communications@hmtreasury.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use. Reforming the Senior Managers & Certification Regime: Consultation Response HTML Detail of outcome This document sets out the government’s planned reforms to the Senior Managers and Certification Regime. These include:   Removing rigid statutory requirements around certification, enabling the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority to consider whether and how a more proportionate, risk based framework should operate through their rulebooks. Simplifying senior manager approval processes, ensuring regulators can pre-approve certain senior roles, and use notification where appropriate. Reducing administrative requirements set in legislation, including around Statements of Responsibilities and Conduct Rules processes, while retaining regulators’ powers to set standards and intervene where concerns arise. Original consultation Summary The government is consulting on reforms to the Senior Managers & Certification Regime, with the aim of streamlining the regime to support growth and competitiveness. This consultation ran from10am on 15 July 2025 to 11:59pm on 7 October 2025 Consultation description The Senior Managers & Certification Regime (SM&CR) was introduced in 2016 to increase individual accountability within the financial services sector, following the financial crisis. Today, the regime covers almost all firms regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA). In 2023, the previous government launched a Call for Evidence into the performance, effectiveness and scope of the regime. Responses detailed concerns about the compliance burdens and frictions the SM&CR can cause, especially when appointing new executives. The government is now consulting on legislative changes that aim to reduce regulatory burdens imposed by the SM&CR, without undermining its overall effect to maintain high standards in the financial services sector. It also provides a summary of the responses to the 2023 Call for Evidence. Documents Reforming the Senior Managers & Certification Regime: Consultation PDF, 340 KB, 48 pages This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology. Request an accessible format. If you use assistive technology (such as a screen reader) and need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email digital.communications@hmtreasury.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what assistive technology you use. Reforming the Senior Managers & Certification Regime: Consultation (Accessible) HTML

Firms will benefit from reduced costs and greater flexibility, and find it easier to comply with the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SM&CR), following reforms set out on 22 April by the FCA and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA). The changes, which come as the first phase of a multi-stage package of reform from the Government and regulators, will maintain the core principle of senior leader accountability, and will benefit firms by: Giving more time to submit senior manager applications when there has been an unexpected or temporary change. Removing the need to certify people to hold multiple overlapping functions, which will reduce the total number of certification roles required by around 15%. Helping to streamline annual checks to certify individuals as ‘fit and proper’. Making only larger, more complex firms meet enhanced standards, by raising many of the enhanced firm thresholds by 30%. Helping to better understand the definition of certain senior management roles. Allowing more time to report updates to senior manager responsibilities. Increasing how long criminal record checks for senior manager applications are valid for, prior to application submission. Giving more time to update the directory, which lists certified staff. The Government’s further changes to the regime, published in its consultation response on 22 April, follow its consultation in 2025. Proposals include removing the Certification Regime, which applies to less senior roles, from legislation. The Government also proposes giving more flexibility to the regulators to further reduce the number of senior management functions (SMFs) which require pre-approval. The regulators plan to consult on wider changes, taking advantage of any increased legislative freedom later in 2026, as part of the Leeds reforms to halve the SM&CR’s regulatory burden on firms. Lucy Rigby, Economic Secretary to the Treasury, said: 'The UK has some of the highest standards for financial sector governance in the world. They protect consumers, strengthen market integrity and are emulated internationally, helping make our financial services sector one of the great jewels in our economic crown. 'We are committed to preserving those high standards – while making regulation simpler and easier to navigate. By working with regulators to streamline the Senior Managers and Certification Regime, we are cutting unnecessary complexity, halving the administrative burden, and building a simpler, faster and more competitive system.' Sarah Pritchard, deputy chief executive at the FCA, said: ‘These joint reforms will keep consumers and markets protected while making the regime more proportionate. We’ve also used our current powers to streamline the regime now, so firms can benefit before future legislation unlocks even more efficiencies.' David Bailey, executive director for prudential policy at the PRA, said: ‘The SM&CR plays an important role in ensuring accountability in the provision of financial services, but it is right that we work to ensure it is well-targeted and efficient. Today’s reforms are an important first step in allowing firms to focus on what matters most, and we will continue to deliver further improvements to the regime as part of the wider reforms being made by the Government.’  The announcement builds on work already done to speed up SM&CR approvals:  The FCA’s most recent published quarterly metrics show 99.7% of applications were determined within the current 3-month statutory deadline, with 94.7% determined within the Government's proposed new 2-month statutory deadline. The PRA’s most recent quarterly metricsLink is external show 100% of applications were determined within the current 3-month statutory deadline, with 98% determined within the Government's proposed new 2-month statutory deadline.  Background The SM&CR ensures accountability among senior managers within financial services firms and maintains standards of behaviour and competence across the board.  Read the FCA’s Policy Statement, PS26/6: ‘Senior Managers and Certification Regime review’.   Read the PRA’s Policy Statement, PS12/26: Senior Managers & Certification Regime reviewLink is external.  The Treasury has also published a consultation response to support a further phase in which the regulators would be able to make additional changes if legislation is made. This includes developing a more proportionate replacement for the Certification Regime and significantly reducing the number of roles requiring regulatory pre-approval. Read the Treasury’s consultation responseLink is external.  Firms now have up to 12 weeks to submit a senior manager application, rather than needing FCA approval within that period.  The Certification Regime is part of SM&CR that applies to staff who are not senior managers, but whose roles could still cause significant harm to consumers or markets – known as Certified Individuals.  In December 2022, the Government announced, as part of the Edinburgh ReformsLink is external, that the Treasury, FCA and PRA would begin reviews of the SM&CR. In March 2023, the FCA published a Discussion Paper with the PRA, inviting views on the regime’s effectiveness, scope and proportionality, and on potential improvements that could be made. The Treasury launched a Call for EvidenceLink is external on the regime alongside this.  In July 2025, the regulators published phase 1 proposals to reform the SM&CR. To help accelerate through phase 2, the FCA also sought views on potential changes for phase 2 – as well as inviting any other ideas of reducing burden while maintaining the benefits of the SM&CR.  See the FCA’s latest authorisation operating metrics (Q3 2025/26) and the PRA’s authorisations performance reportLink is external (Q4 2025/26). Enhanced scope SM&CR firms are the largest and most complex firms. The financial thresholds for becoming an Enhanced SM&CR firm are being updated for inflation since their introduction in 2019, by 30%.

Global securities finance revenue reached $3.84 billion in Q1 2026, up 31% year-over-year - a record start to the year and a continuation of the $15.3 billion 2025 print.   Asia Pacific led every region, up 48% YOY ($884 million in lender-to-broker revenue). Korea alone was up 724% YOY following the return of short selling, and Hong Kong on-loan balances more than doubled.   Bears wasted no time piling in after the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran and the Strait of Hormuz closure. Our data shows meaningful short-interest builds across energy, airlines, and utilities - names in focus include Delta (DAL), American (AAL), NextEra (NEE), Xcel (XEL), International Seaways (INSW), easyJet (EZJ LN), and Lufthansa (LHA GR).   AI crowding evolved from a directional trade into a sorting machine. IT led sector revenue at $464 million globally, with SEALSQ (LAES), Hanmi (042700 KS), and GlobalWafers (6488 TT) among the top borrow earners as investors bet against parts of the semiconductor rally.   EquiLend also went live with Predicted Short Interest this quarter, closing the reporting lag on FINRA and exchange data. Early case studies on Cango (CANG), SPX Technologies (SPXC), and Seagate (STX) are in the report. Click here to download the report.

Thank you, David and thank you to Brookings for having me speak today.1 Whenever anyone hears the words "Federal Reserve" they immediately think about monetary policy and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) setting the federal funds rate. There is obviously tremendous media attention on those policy decisions, as there should be because they affect U.S. households and businesses and financial markets around the world. But the FOMC only meets 16 days a year to set monetary policy, so what are we doing at the Fed the rest of the time? The answer to that question is that we run a large and complex organization across 12 Federal Reserve Districts, with a heavy operations focus. So today I want to talk about how we meet these operational responsibilities to give you a better understanding of the structure of the Fed and what we do each day. As I will explain, there were and remain good reasons for the Fed's decentralized structure, which is mandated under the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. It is an important enabler in carrying out our many vital responsibilities, which affect virtually everyone in every corner of America. But that doesn't mean the Fed's operations should not change to reflect a changing world. As the Board member responsible for leading the oversight of Federal Reserve operations on behalf of my colleagues, I believe the Federal Reserve needs to be continuously oriented toward modernizing how it operates—reducing costs, more effectively managing risk, and delivering the best possible value to the American taxpayer. And that has been my objective since I became the member of the Board of Governors responsible for Reserve Bank oversight. To explain why that matters and what it has meant in practice, I will start with a brief overview of the structure of the Fed and describe how its operations have evolved over time, including over the last few years under my direction. I will then address two questions that I believe are critical for thinking about how the Federal Reserve should organize its work in the 21st century. First, which Fed activities are intrinsically local, and conducted for the benefit of an individual Federal Reserve District? Second, which activities are conducted on behalf of the Federal Reserve System as a whole, with attendant opportunities to exploit specialization, economies of scope, and economies of scale? In short, what needs to be done at a Reserve Bank and what can be done more efficiently elsewhere in the System? A Short History of Operations in the FRSTo begin with a quick orientation, the Federal Reserve System is composed of the Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., the 12 regional Reserve Banks located across the country and the Federal Open Market Committee. In this speech, I will focus solely on the Reserve Banks and not the Board or the FOMC. All told, there are approximately 20,000 employees across the 12 Banks, with the vast majority focused on operations—implementing market operations, performing fiscal agent activities for the U.S. Treasury, and running the Fed's payment systems, along with all the support and overhead functions like information technology (IT), human resources (HR), finance, and procurement that go along with operating 12 Reserve Banks. The Federal Reserve was created as a compromise between those who recognized the need for a U.S. central bank and those who were suspicious of concentrating such power in Washington or New York. The result was a decentralized system of 12 regional Reserve Banks with boards of directors drawn from the local business community. Although ultimate oversight in many respects resides with federally appointed officials in Washington, from the beginning each Reserve Bank was a self-contained organization. Each provided services, including check processing, wire transactions, and cash distribution, to the commercial banks in the District that had elected to be members. With membership in the Federal Reserve System, a bank received certain benefits and incurred certain obligations, notably to submit to regular examinations by the Reserve Bank in their District. Due to branching restrictions at the time, a member bank was in that District and that District only. In addition to these services and oversight, each Reserve Bank also collected local economic information and data and did analysis of the local economy. Initially, the discount rate at each Bank was set locally to reflect local economic and credit conditions. At the beginning, everything a Reserve Bank did was "local"—no national functions were performed. This decentralized approach made more sense when the economy and the banking system were much more regional in nature, but as finance and the economy became more national in scope, changes were needed. Statutory changes were made by Congress to the Federal Reserve Act in 1935 under which the presidents of the Reserve Banks took on a national role in setting monetary policy via the FOMC. The discount rate was also "nationalized" so that all Banks charged the same rate for lending to local banks. But after these changes, most Reserve Bank operations remained local. While monetary policy was conducted at the national level, bank supervision, payment system activities, and most other functions at Reserve Banks remained focused on serving its District. Also characteristic of the early years were Reserve Banks that had large numbers of workers engaged in what were at that time highly manual and labor-intensive processes. Such work included processing paper checks, managing distribution of coins and currency, "discounting" or providing commercial banks liquidity against a variety of instruments—often taking physical custody of this collateral to assure a security interest—and managing U.S. Treasury securities. In this era, Reserve Banks operated under a clear "Bank first, System second" mindset. In rare instances that required more of a "System" approach—for example, managing transactions between banks in different Federal Reserve Districts—this coordination occurred through occasional meetings of the Conference of Presidents, an ad hoc group composed of the 12 Reserve Bank presidents. A deeply embedded and long-standing common understanding of the decisionmaking process for the Conference of Presidents was that the group could not force a Bank to do anything—everything had to be resolved by consensus. This decisionmaking process was consistent with the view that the Reserve Banks were essentially independent, private-sector, and governed by the local boards of directors rooted in the District and thus had the freedom to operate as they saw fit within the broad confines of the Federal Reserve Act. Drivers of TransformationOver the decades, as technology changed and U.S. financial sector regulation evolved, the external environment began to shift in important ways. As financial transactions became increasingly digital in the 1960s, the Fed developed new, nationwide electronic payment capabilities. Congress ended bank branching restrictions in the 1980s. Regulatory changes allowed national banking organizations to emerge, a phenomenon which broke the one-to-one connection between a Reserve Bank and its member commercial banks. Commercial banks with operations across multiple Districts were not enthralled with needing to maintain relationships with multiple Reserve Banks, each of which offered slightly different mixes of services and slightly different pricing. In 1981, Congress directed the Fed to recover the costs associated with its payment services through fees levied on both member and nonmember banks, a requirement intended to level the playing field between the Reserve Banks and private-sector providers of payment services. By the mid-1990s, the Reserve Banks had begun consolidating their payment services in response to those developments. Some key services were starting to be centralized in specific Districts with the establishment of "product offices" to provide uniform services to banks nationally. Over this same period, check volumes began to drop precipitously as digital payments gained steam and the private sector took market share from the Fed in check processing. The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, underscored the vulnerability of a payment system that still relied on leased airplanes to fly paper checks around the nation. The digitization of paper checks followed the Check 21 Act in the early 2000s and led to a further reduction in the processing of physical checks. The result was that the Reserve Banks saw a significant reduction in operations and employment at their Branches, to the point of closing and selling some buildings. Even at head offices, the automation of check processing and other labor-intensive payments work reduced manpower needs and employment. The era when most head offices and many Branches ran three shifts of check processing each business day ended. On another front, as information technology advanced rapidly in the 1980s and 1990s, the Reserve Banks realized there were economies of scale to be achieved by centralizing information technology infrastructure into one location that would operate on behalf of the entire system. It made no sense for each Reserve Bank to construct, operate, and maintain its own mainframe or, later, server farm. Thus, in the early '90s the Reserve Banks created Federal Reserve Automation Services (FRAS, now referred to as National IT), to build and maintain a single common IT infrastructure. A FRAS director was named to manage this consolidated infrastructure but most decision authority remained at the individual Reserve Banks. More recently, in 2021, Fed financial services were consolidated into a single national payment service line, with its own chief payments executive (CPE) who would oversee payment operations across 12 Reserve Banks. With the appointment of a CPE, and the increased authority of the chief information officer, the Fed had moved into a world where its arguably most critical operational responsibilities were managed at the System rather than the individual Bank level. Another example of the Fed's gradual move toward centralization is in its role as fiscal agent for the Treasury, handling payments and securities issuance, auctions and redemptions, as well as providing other banking services. Most of this work as fiscal agent was spread around the Reserve Banks. In 2014, Treasury's Bureau of the Fiscal Service began to largely consolidate fiscal agency work in St. Louis, Kansas City, and Cleveland while the Federal Reserve Bank of New York continued to manage U.S. Treasury auctions and certain other activities that required direct market interactions. Despite this gradual movement toward more centralization in payments, IT, and fiscal agency, many support functions, including HR, procurement, and finance are still run more or less separately at each of the 12 Reserve Banks. In my view, we have reached a point where we need to better exploit the efficiency and risk reduction benefits of standardizing and probably centrally leading all of these functions. I believe there is significant opportunity for more improvement. Two Categories: What Must Be Local and What No Longer Needs to BeAt this point I want to return to the two questions I posed at the beginning. What Reserve Bank functions must be done locally, because they serve and must be tailored to the needs of a specific District, and which can be done anywhere to the benefit of the entire System? Let's start with what activities are inherently District-oriented, consistent with the original intent of the Federal Reserve Act, namely that the U.S. should have a central bank that reflects the needs of different regions and not be solely connected to Wall Street or Washington. These are the activities where geography still matters. Clearly, some of the work that has always been carried out by different Districts in different ways remains appropriately local in approach and substance today. I see no reason to reduce the number of Reserve Banks or alter their geographic boundaries. Each Bank president still has an independent voice at the FOMC on the appropriate course of monetary policy and that should continue. Each president's views are shaped by the research of the Bank's economists, its regional experts, the input from the Bank's board of directors, and the president's interactions with business leaders in the District. Each Bank president contributes that perspective to the discussion in Washington with his or her colleagues, which generates a view of the economy as a whole at the national level and thus what direction policy should take. In addition to contributing to the development of monetary policy, each president engages with the business, financial, and nonprofit communities to understand local economic issues, and to position the Bank to serve as a convener of various interest groups to address local economic issues, such as labor force development, financial inclusion, and issues related to rural areas. These activities are enormously valuable to carrying out the Fed's mission, and they should continue. Each Reserve Bank also still conducts supervision of state member banks and bank holding companies, relying on the regional knowledge and expertise of supervisors based in the District and on regional industries and economic trends. Local presence will continue to be important. This local expertise is also important when the Reserve Bank serves as a lender to depository institutions. Market operations are concentrated in New York, in proximity to the securities dealers who facilitate the implementation of monetary policy through open market operations. Now let's turn to a very different class of activities that are important to the System's overall operations and for which geography does not matter. These functions are increasingly platform-based, technology-driven, and scale-sensitive. The list includes HR systems, payroll and benefits administration, finance and accounting, procurement, and vendor management, as well as the payments, IT, and fiscal agency work. These functions are not delivered better or more efficiently with geographic dispersion. Nor are they unique to a district. They improve with integration, scale, and standardization. With that comes lower operating costs, risk reduction, and greater savings for the American taxpayer. With these functions our philosophy must be "System first, Bank second." This is the message I have been delivering to the Reserve banks the last three years in terms of how our operations need to be organized and managed. The Inflection Point: Why This Moment Is DifferentYou may be asking, why am I bringing this up now? Haven't the Reserve Banks consistently evolved to changes in the environment around them as I described earlier? Why can't this evolution continue organically? The answer is that I do not believe that this traditional approach will meet the moment, and the needs of the U.S. economy, for several reasons: First, the external environment has changed. Technology cycles are faster and more disruptive. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a coming storm that threatens to alter and, I believe, improve all organizations. The pace of technological change today means that the Fed does not have the time to sit back and ruminate about changes. If we are going to ride this wave, and not be drowned by it, we need greater agility to capture efficiencies and manage risks, such as cybersecurity and incorporating AI into our system processes. Second, consolidating functions makes sense for competing in talent markets that are increasingly national and sometimes global. We will achieve greater efficiency through consolidation and also attract the best talent in finance, HR, and procurement by offering people the opportunity to work for a national organization, with greater responsibility and impact. Finally, benchmarking against the private sector is unavoidable. We are significantly "off-market" on IT costs, largely because of localized development of applications and procurement of software, and because of the complexity of our offerings across the Banks. We are not exploiting the available economies of scale or risk reduction benefit across a wider range of areas. Other large organizations have long faced financial pressure to standardize, centralize, and, in some cases, outsource. One critical benefit from Reserve Bank boards of directors having private-sector CEOs among their members is the ability of these directors to point out where our costs are out of line and how we might improve both efficiency and performance. A Path Forward: Two Models for Operational ModernizationAs we consider the future framework for Reserve Bank operations, one thing is clear—we are not going to return to a world where everything is done locally. So, looking forward, I believe that two models for the further evolution of the Fed's operational footprint are worth considering. The first is standardization with centralized System leadership. Under this model, the current physical footprint of the Reserve Banks remains largely intact, but each major support function—IT, HR, finance, procurement, vendor management, and facilities—is placed under a single senior leader who runs that function on behalf of the entire System. That leader sets standards, makes enterprise-wide decisions, manages vendors, and is accountable for performance across all 12 Districts. Local staff remain in place but operate within a unified framework rather than 12 separate ones. System function leaders would operate within the existing Federal Reserve governance structure, reporting through Reserve Bank presidents and local boards, with the Board of Governors providing oversight. This is not a reorganization that centralizes authority in Washington. It is one that empowers the System to act as one enterprise while preserving the governance architecture the Federal Reserve Act established. This model captures much of standardization—lower cost, reduced risk, and greater consistency—without requiring the more difficult work of physical consolidation. The second model goes further. If an outside consultant were asked to design the Fed's operating system from scratch, I believe it would be a lot closer to this second model. It takes everything in the first model and adds physical consolidation across key functions. Functions that do not need to be local—HR administration, payroll, finance and accounting, procurement, and certain IT operations—are concentrated in a small number of operations centers located in lower-cost cities or those that have a comparative labor skills advantage. Outsourcing certain activities should occur if the opportunity for cost savings warrants it. The specialized work that genuinely requires District presence remains in the Districts. Everything else follows the economics. The System gains not only the benefits of unified leadership and standardized processes, but also the full economies of consolidated facilities and labor markets. As with the first model, the formal legal structure of the Federal Reserve remains unchanged. System function leaders report through Reserve Bank presidents and local boards, with the Board of Governors providing oversight consistent with its statutory role. What must change for this approach to succeed is not the Fed's structure but its long-held expectation that every significant operational decision requires consensus across 12 institutions. This second model is the one that large, well-run organizations—both public and private sector—have largely converged on, and it represents the more complete realization of what operational modernization can achieve. Either model represents a meaningful step forward. But it should be said plainly: the first is a waypoint, not a destination. The full benefits—in cost, in resilience, in cybersecurity, and in talent—are probably realized only under the second approach. An obvious implication of this second model is that some Reserve Banks may face lower levels of employment in the future. As happened with the closing of Branches when check clearing went away, I believe we will need to rethink the physical footprint of the Reserve Banks going forward. Both models also require a shift in how operational decisions are made. A System in which senior leaders run enterprise-wide functions requires genuine delegation of authority—more authority than most Reserve Bank first vice presidents exercise today. Decisions about HR administration, IT architecture, procurement strategy, and facilities standards need to be made at the System level and not decided district by district. That requires not just delegation of authority but a genuine shift away from consensus-based operational decisionmaking. The decisionmaking model, based on debate and consensus, that serves us well in the Board Room when developing monetary policy is not ideal when it comes to running our operations. A leader of a System function who must secure agreement from 12 quasi-independent institutions before acting cannot be an effective leader. I believe we need a key shift in our approach to governance—we need to distinguish between decisions that need consensus for effective change and those where consensus becomes a hindrance to effective change. Closing: Preserving the Federal Design by Modernizing the MachineryThe punchline of this speech is that we need to do more to centralize our operations into national lines of business and move away from having individual Reserve Banks managing operational infrastructure from a Bank mindset instead of a System mindset. We need to have strong leadership and governance of these national business lines, and this does not mean it can always be accomplished through a consensus of 12 Reserve Bank presidents. Inefficient governance and overlapping lines of authority lead to cost inefficiencies and unnecessary risk. On the other hand, I believe we have an opportunity to leverage scale and our talent across the System to produce better outcomes for U.S. households and businesses. Decentralization is a strength of the design of the Federal Reserve—but only when it reflects the genuine strengths of regional differentiation, not fragmentation for its own sake. Autonomy is a virtue—but not when it produces costly duplication that serves no one. We owe this to the American people we serve. Tradition deserves respect—but not when it stands in the way of necessary change. To leave you with a final takeaway, operational excellence at the Federal Reserve depends on our willingness to standardize what should be standardized and centralize what should be centralized, so that we can strengthen what must remain distinctly regional to meet the needs of a large and heterogenous country. This is an important conversation and I appreciate the constructive engagement of all. 1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. 

The attached option classes will begin trading on the MIAX Options Exchange, MIAX Pearl Options Exchange, MIAX Emerald Options Exchange, and MIAX Sapphire Options Exchange on Wednesday, April 22, 2026.Market Makers can use the Member Firm Portal (MFP) to manage their option class assignments.  All LMM and RMM Option Class Assignments must be entered prior to 6:00 PM ET on the business day immediately preceding the effective date.  All changes made after 6:00 PM ET on a given day will be effective two trading days later.MIAX Options and MIAX Emerald Options Primary Lead Market Maker (PLMM) assignments and un-assignments will not be supported via the MFP. Please contact MIAX Listings with any questions at Listings@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7308. MIAX Options® Exchange MIAX Pearl® Options Exchange MIAX Emerald® Options Exchange MIAX Sapphire™ Options Exchange

Please refer to the Regulatory Circulars listed below for newly added symbols and the corresponding market for the underlying security used for openings on the MIAX Exchanges. The newly listed symbols will be available for trading beginning Wednesday, April 22, 2026. MIAX Options Regulatory Circular 2026-53 MIAX Pearl Options Regulatory Circular 2026-53 MIAX Emerald Options Regulatory Circular 2026-42 MIAX Sapphire Options Regulatory Circular 2026-55 Please direct questions to the Regulatory Department at Regulatory@miaxglobal.com or (609) 897-7309.

An Alberta Securities Commission (ASC) panel has issued a written decision providing reasons for its December 19, 2025 interim order against Midas Vantage Projects (MVP) Lithium Limited, Carolyn Jean Orazietti, also known as Carolyn Jean Beeler, and Vinay Ramachand Iyer, also known as Max Iyer (collectively, the Respondents). Staff issued a Notice of Hearing on December 11, 2025, seeking an interim order under the Securities Act (Alberta) to protect the public while Staff completes an investigation into whether the Respondents have breached the Act. Following a hearing on December 19, 2025, the panel found sufficient evidence that the Respondents have engaged in fraud, made prohibited representations about MVP securities, and misled Staff such that an interim order was in the public interest.  In its written decision of April 16, 2026, the panel noted the seriousness of the alleged misconduct, potential harm to investors, and indicated that the imposition of an interim order was justified to prevent ongoing capital market misconduct while an investigation and hearing proceed. A copy of the written decision can be found on the ASC website at asc.ca. The ASC is the regulatory agency responsible for administering the province's securities laws. It is entrusted with fostering a fair and efficient capital market in Alberta and with protecting investors. As a member of the Canadian Securities Administrators, the ASC works to improve, coordinate and harmonize the regulation of Canada's capital markets.

New York Attorney General Letitia James today sued Coinbase Financial Markets, Inc. (Coinbase) and Gemini, Titan LLC (Gemini) for illegally running gambling operations in New York through their so-called “prediction market” platforms. Both Coinbase and Gemini offer users the ability to bet on events, including sports, entertainment, and elections, in violation of New York laws. An investigation by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) found that Coinbase and Gemini are running prediction markets that constitute illegal, unlicensed gambling operations. These illegal operations expose New Yorkers – including those under the legal gambling age of 21 – to serious financial and personal risk. Attorney General James is seeking court orders requiring Coinbase and Gemini to pay fines, forfeit illegal profits, and pay restitution to customers. “Gambling by another name is still gambling, and it is not exempt from regulation under our state laws and Constitution,” said Attorney General James. “Gemini and Coinbase’s so-called prediction markets are just illegal gambling operations, exposing young people to addictive platforms that lack the necessary guardrails. My office is taking action to protect New Yorkers and stop these platforms from violating the law.” Coinbase and Gemini opened prediction markets available to New Yorkers over the age of 18. Prediction markets allow users to bet money on the outcome of a wide range of future events, from sports games to elections to award shows. Because the outcomes of these events are uncertain and outside the control of the bettor, or hinge on a game of chance, these prediction market platforms fit the legal definition of gambling in New York. Coinbase and Gemini have failed to obtain a license from the New York State Gaming Commission, sidestepping their obligation to pay taxes like licensed casinos and mobile sports gambling platforms do. This tax revenue funds public schools, sports programs for underserved youth, and problem gambling education and treatment. Coinbase and Gemini’s prediction markets are also available to users between the ages of 18-20, even though New York law states that a person must be at least 21 years old to participate in mobile sports betting. Exposing young people to online gambling can have damaging effects on their mental and financial wellbeing. A recent study by the National Institutes of Health found that early exposure to gambling increases the likelihood of depression, anxiety, mood swings, and financial stress. Further, a study by the American Psychological Association found that 32 percent of those with a gambling disorder experience suicidal ideation. Attorney General James’ lawsuits also allege that Gemini and Coinbase are violating New York laws that forbid any betting on games in which New York college teams participate. In her lawsuits filed today, Attorney General James is asking the court to require Coinbase and Gemini to forfeit illegal profits, distribute restitution to consumers who were harmed, and pay fines equal to three times the profits the companies made through their illegal actions. Today’s lawsuits are the latest actions in Attorney General James’ continued efforts to enforce New York laws in the crypto and gambling industries and protect New York consumers. Attorney General James has issued multiple consumer alerts warning New Yorkers about the hazards of gambling, and has issued industry alerts to encourage compliance with state laws. Attorney General James has also taken action to prevent illegal gambling in New York. In January of 2026, she sued Valve, a video game developer, for illegally promoting gambling through video games popular with children and teenagers. In June 2025, Attorney General James announced that OAG stopped 26 illegal online sweepstakes casinos that offered slots, table games, and sports betting using virtual coins that could be exchanged for cash and prizes. Attorney General James urges New Yorkers to ensure gambling platforms are registered with the New York State Gaming Commission and report any misconduct or gaming fraud to OAG by filing a complaint online, which can be done anonymously, or calling 1-800-771-7755. The case is being handled by handled by Assistant Attorney Generals Alejandra de Urioste, K. Brent Tomer, Daniel Wiesenfeld, and Nina Varindani and Senior Enforcement Counsel Tanya Trakht of the Investor Protection Bureau, with assistance from Legal Assistant Renata Bodner and Senior Detective Brian Metz of the Investigations Division. The Investor Protection Bureau is led by Bureau Chief Shamiso Maswoswe and Deputy Bureau Chief Kenneth Haim and is a part of the Division of Economic Justice, which is overseen by Chief Deputy Attorney General Chris D’Angelo and First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN) and NGX Regulation Limited (NGX RegCo) have hosted the 3rd edition of the Corporate Reporting Awards, recognising listed companies on Nigerian Exchange (NGX) for excellence in financial reporting, corporate governance, and sustainability disclosures for the 2024 financial year. The awards, which cover companies on the NGX 30 Index, assess performance across three pillars: Financial Reporting (35 per cent), Corporate Governance (30 per cent), and Sustainability Reporting (35 per cent). Organisers said the 2024 assessment was conducted under strict confidentiality and objectivity, with outcomes based strictly on merit. The exercise builds on earlier editions covering the 2022 and 2023 financial years and continues to serve as a benchmark for corporate disclosure standards in the Nigerian capital market. Speaking at the ceremony, ICAN President and Chairman of Council, Mallam Haruna Nma Yahaya, mni, Ph.D., FCA, said corporate reporting has evolved significantly beyond compliance, becoming a strategic instrument for communicating purpose, resilience, and direction. He noted that organisations are now expected not only to report performance but also to demonstrate how they are responding to change and creating sustainable value. “Corporate reporting has evolved beyond compliance to become a strategic tool that communicates purpose, resilience, and direction. In today’s environment, organisations are expected not only to report performance, but also to demonstrate how they are adapting to change and creating sustainable value. Transparency remains central to building trust, strengthening investor confidence, and supporting market stability,” he said. Also speaking, the Chief Executive Officer of NGX Regulation Limited, Mr. Femi Shobanjo, said strong corporate reporting remains critical to enhancing market integrity and sustaining investor confidence. He highlighted NGX RegCo’s continued adoption of global reporting frameworks, including the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), the Nigerian Code of Corporate Governance, and the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards (IFRS S1 and S2). According to him, the growing emphasis on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) disclosures reflect an important shift in market expectations, as sustainability considerations are increasingly becoming central to corporate strategy and long-term value creation. “Strong corporate reporting is fundamental to market integrity and investor confidence. Beyond financial performance, there is now clear expectation for companies to disclose how environmental, social, and governance considerations are embedded in their strategy. Long-term corporate success is increasingly linked to the integration of sustainability into core business decisions,” he said. He added that the “Most Improved Company” category was introduced to encourage continuous improvement in reporting quality among listed firms. International Breweries Plc was named Most Improved Company (Overall), while First HoldCo Plc won the Sustainability Reporting Award. Zenith Bank Plc received the Corporate Governance Award, and MTN Nigeria Communications Plc clinched the Financial Reporting Award. In the top overall category, Access Holdings Plc won Silver, Airtel Africa Plc took Gold, while Seplat Energy Plc emerged Platinum winner. The awards have become a benchmark for corporate reporting excellence in Nigeria’s capital market, reflecting ongoing efforts by ICAN and NGX RegCo to strengthen transparency, accountability, and sustainable value creation. Both institutions reaffirmed their commitment to raising reporting standards and deepening investor confidence in the Nigerian capital market.

The Joint Forum of Financial Market Regulators has concluded its Annual Meeting held this year in Montreal, Quebec on April 15th. The Joint Forum brings together members of the Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators (CCIR), the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA), the Canadian Association of Pension Supervisory Authorities (CAPSA) and includes representation from the Canadian Insurance Services Regulatory Organizations and the Mortgage Brokers’ Council of Canada. As part of the plenary session, members heard from Jessica Mosher, policy analyst with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), who presented findings from the OECD’s research on policies to improve access to high-quality financial advice and outcomes for retirement. The research highlights key barriers retirees face and potential approaches to better support informed financial decision-making. Angela Mazerolle, CAPSA Chair and Vice-President of Regulatory Operations and Superintendent of Pensions at the Financial and Consumer Services Commission of New Brunswick, and host of this year’s meeting, noted: “As more Canadians retire amid rising costs, maintaining purchasing power is an increasing challenge. How individuals interact with the financial sector in retirement is a critical issue for regulators to continue addressing together.” Participants also heard from Bonnie-Jeanne MacDonald, Director of Financial Security Research, and Barbara Sanders, Associate Fellow, of the National Institute on Ageing (NIA), who presented Retirement Beyond Pensions: How to Help Canadians Better Prepare. The NIA focuses on advancing the financial security of Canadians in retirement through research, collaboration and policy engagement. CAPSA joined the NIA as a member in 2025. Patrick Déry, CCIR Chair and Superintendent of Financial Institutions at the Autorité des marchés financiers, said: “Retirees often rely on financial products and advice that span multiple regulated sectors. The Joint Forum provides a valuable opportunity for regulators to examine these intersecting areas and strengthen coordination in the public interest.” The Joint Forum also welcomed keynote speaker Jorge Tenreiro, securities litigation partner at Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, who shared perspectives on the current North American political environment and its potential implications for Canada’s regulated financial sectors. Stan Magidson, Chair of the CSA and Chair and CEO of the Alberta Securities Commission, added: “This year’s discussions reinforced the importance of regulatory cooperation in supporting retirees, particularly during periods of economic uncertainty. Working together helps deliver better outcomes for Canadians as they navigate this stage of life.” The CSA, the council of the securities regulators of Canada’s provinces and territories, coordinates and harmonizes regulation for the Canadian capital markets.   CCIR is a national inter-jurisdictional association of insurance regulators. The mandate of the CCIR is to facilitate and promote an efficient and effective insurance regulatory system in Canada to serve the public interest.   CAPSA is a national association of pension regulators whose mission is to facilitate an efficient and effective pension regulatory system in Canada. It develops practical solutions and guidance to further the coordination and harmonization of pension regulatory principles across Canada.

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has published the 2025 European Single Electronic Format (ESEF) XBRL taxonomy files, together with an updated ESEF Conformance Suite. These materials support issuers and software vendors in preparing 2026 IFRS consolidated financial statements using the most up‑to‑date ESEF format.  The 2025 taxonomy reflects the introduction of IFRS 18 Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements, effective from 1 January 2027, with early application permitted. The ESEF taxonomy includes two entry points, allowing issuers to report under either IAS 1 and IFRS 18. This approach facilitates prompt understanding of the new structure, encourages timely preparation, and lowers implementation risks. ESMA does not plan to amend the ESEF RTS or taxonomy in 2026. This follows the  IFRS Foundation’s decision not to issue a 2026 IFRS Accounting Taxonomy update and will provide greater regulatory stability and more time for implementation. Next steps  ESMA encourages issuers and software providers to consult the IFRS Foundation’s guidance on the use of the 2025 IFRS Accounting Taxonomy for 2026 reporting periods when preparing for upcoming reporting requirements. Stakeholders wishing to provide feedback or raise questions on the 2025 ESEF Taxonomy and Conformance Suite are invited to contact esef@esma.europa.eu. Related Documents DateReferenceTitleDownloadSelect 21/04/2026 ESEF Taxonomy 2025 ESEF Taxonomy 2025 21/04/2026 ESEF Conformance Suite 2025 ESEF Conformance Suite 2025

To increase the effectiveness of equity market microstructure, MOEX establishes the new tick size and Decimals parameter for the following stocks starting 5th May 2026 in the following trading modes: Main trading mode Т+ ("Т+1" order book) Odd lots trading mode Negotiated trades mode (NTM) NTM with CCP trading mode The new approach to setting the tick size was approved by the MOEX Securities Market committee. The methodology includes: The tick size equals (1,2,5)*10N, where N – integer; Increasing the number of price ranges to 25, and the ranges of liquidity - up to 7; For each liquidity range a recommended range price tick sizes in the spread is established; The maximum allowed relative tick size – 1% Read more on the Moscow Exchange: https://www.moex.com/n99517