The FCA proposal copied the wrong homework from a weak neighbour.  The faulted ESMA equity RTS confused the concept between ‘single source of truth’ and ‘single source of access’ repeating the fatal flaw of the US Consolidated Audit Trail. A wide latency tolerance mussed up data that one cannot roll the data forward and backward to see which trade message came in first, second, third, or a hundred thousandth. In turn, it is not suitable for BestEx, surveillance, or regulatory market monitoring purposes. Worst, it affects the EBBO to be stale with a widespread, broadcasting that there is no opportunity in Europe. Quality without the appropriate benchmarks is NOT quality. Unlike the Bond Tape where the key issue is about reference data, equity CT is about latency, bandwidth, and capacity to handle peak volume. Neglecting how self-aggregators and ultra / low-latency vendors can consolidate data in justifying their costs is one of the big mistakes in the UK and EU assumptions. US experience has shown low-latency subscribers to SIPs yield 30+% savings from subscribing only to 7 of the 11 top proprietary feeds. Market data vendors, particularly those who provide ultra or low-latency feeds, as well as transaction cost analysers, smart order routers, outsourced execution service providers profit from market fragmentation. It is more lucrative to serve selected investment firms that paid them a premium than becoming a CTP in risking their relationships with Exchange Groups and Wholesalers. Unless there is a higher incentive to make it worthwhile for these ultra or low-latency market data vendors or infrastructure providers to compensate their opportunity loss, their services would remain a complimentary product or value-added service instead of competing with Exchanges’ proprietary products. Scenario 4 (top 5 pre-trade bids and offers from lit venues and SIs, distributed with a latency of 20-40 milliseconds) is the BEST option among the four, amid we have reservations about SIs’ data. Investment firms are adjusting to the US Market Data Infrastructure Rules and Transparency of Better Priced Orders requirements. Most system upgrades costs would already be covered and absorbed by their US branch or would be shared globally. ‘Round lot’ tiers offer protected, actionable liquidity rather than ‘phantom.’ Putting this users’ perspective in mind help UK strengthening the equity CT design and development. Contrasting with an evidence-based approach, there is no good reason for the ‘survey’ to include Scenario 3 (3 pre-trade bids and offers from lit UK venues, distributed with a latency of 40-100 milliseconds) other than using it as to create a ‘Decoy Effect.’ The cost benefit analysis omitted to account for the benefits of non-display low latency subscribers subsidising the subscribers of display feed for equity CT, it confused the UK public and swaying or causing cognitive bias towards Scenario 2 (top-of-book from lit UK venues, distributed with a latency of 100-200 milliseconds). Bringing the sources of the problem to administer/ enforce an inequitable scheme. It will exacerbate initial bias and gaps between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots.’ The average market data price across the UK and EU would further increase by at least 5 to 10%. Market participants would lose faith in the integrity of UK and EU markets. The only interested parties to seek trading opportunities in the UK and EU would be those who can exploit and segment order flow away (i.e. toxics and FAIL to achieve regulatory goals). Please do NOT forget these acknowledged concerns: ‘onerous administrative obligations on data users … excessive fees; increase of fees through penalties; and overly burdensome audits.’ Without a novel approach from new entrance or getting buy-in from at least one of the existing ultra or low-latency feed providers to shake up the dynamics, we are doubtful that the FCA tender process would yield any fruitful result. Equity CT must be a product of reasonable compromise, if not a close substitute, to Trading Venues’ proprietary products or APAs’ value-added services to achieve the regulatory goal of ‘affect competitive pressures for existing seller of market data, resulting in cheaper, higher quality and more accessible data for its users.’ Picking the wrong choice means a ‘sunk cost’ and time loss for the UK. Not only will it be a ‘loss opportunity,’ but prolonging the suffering of unjust situations indeed reinforces ‘initial bias’ and rent seeking behaviours, making it harder or impossible to rectify the mistake afterward. The FCA current proposal defeats the goal of ‘levelling the playing field.’ It fails to meet UK’s regulatory objectives of ‘enhancing price discovery and market competitiveness.’  It is worse than the Jukebox era in the 1970s and we do NOT believe any ‘governance provisions’ would help. Its mindset and ambition are constrained by a focus subordinate to the EU, preventing the UK from competing on a truly global scale. How sad, but it can be rectified if there is a will. The UK now could lead the world by mandating proprietary feeds and CT market data to be available SECURELY in SYNCHRONIZED time per our suggested NEW Scenario 5. By mandating the use of Time-Lock Encryption for both equity CT and proprietary feeds, it eliminates the problem of where the CT data centre is located (cost saving by locating CT away from the most expensive prime zone and is fair). By improving fairness and market integrity, our approach would significantly increase UK competitiveness, attract investments and deepen natural liquidity to grow the overall pie in benefiting all constituents. It is ten times better than the quantifiable net benefits stated under the FCA’s 4 scenarios. UK is now at a juncture to choose between following EU delusional/ slogan-based diplomacy or taking concrete actions in curbing Exchanges from optimally restricted access to price information. It may be time for the Competition and Markets Authority to invoke Antitrust laws to investigate against alleged monopoly or oligopolies, particularly when firms engage in collusive behaviour, price-fixing, or abuse a joint dominant position. We have been informative and the US is transparent without withholding any secret ingredients – all cited information are publicly available. The UK can freely replicate the US SEC Market Data Infrastructure Rules and Transparency of Better Priced Orders requirements as appropriate or take a leap of faith in considering our novel approach. Download our 38-page FCA comment letter for responses to individual questions. By Kelvin To, Founder and President of Data Boiler Technologies Data Boiler is a Type C organization member of the European Commission’s Data Expert Group. Between my patented inventions in signal processing, analytics, machine learning, etc. and the wealth of experience of my partner, Peter Martyn, we are about Market Reform, Governance, Risk, Compliance, and FinTech Innovations to create viable paths toward sustainable economic growth.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today released enforcement actions for February 2026. The enforcement actions released are terminations. The OCC terminates enforcement actions when a bank has demonstrated compliance with all articles of an enforcement action; or when the OCC determines that articles deemed “not in compliance” have become outdated or irrelevant to the bank’s current circumstances; or when the OCC incorporates the articles deemed “not in compliance” into a new action. The termination actions are: Order Terminating the Formal Agreement with First Federal Savings Bank of Kentucky, Frankfort, Kentucky, dated August 13, 2024 (Docket No. AA-CE-2024-62). (Docket No. AA-CE-2026-2) Order Terminating the Formal Agreement with Hiawatha National Bank, Hager City, Wisconsin, dated October 22, 2024 (Docket No. AA-CE-2024-32). (Docket No. AA-CE-2026-8) Order Terminating the Formal Agreement with Minnstar Bank, National Association, Lake Crystal, Minnesota, dated March 12, 2024 (Docket No. AA-CE-2024-2). (Docket No. AA-CE-2025-70) Order Terminating the Formal Agreement with North Side Federal Savings and Loan Association of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, dated November 16, 2023 (Docket No. AA-CE-2023-22). (Docket No. AA-CE-2025-69) Order Terminating the Formal Agreement with Unity National Bank of Houston, Houston, Texas, dated August 30, 2022 (Docket No. AA-SO-2022-9). (Docket No. AA-ENF-2026-9) To receive alerts for news releases announcing public OCC enforcement actions, subscribe to OCC Email Updates. All OCC public enforcement actions taken since August 1989 are available for download by viewing the searchable enforcement actions database at https://apps.occ.gov/EASearch. Related Link Enforcement Action Types

The securities regulatory authorities of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Québec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Yukon and Northwest Territories today announced the adoption of final amendments to Multilateral Instrument 25-102 Designated Benchmarks and Benchmark Administrators and related final changes to its companion policy.  The amendments will clarify the scope and timing of the assurance report requirements by specifying the level of assurance, the type of report an independent public accountant must provide, and when it must be submitted. This will provide greater certainty to the parties preparing these reports, along with a higher level of assurance over the governance and controls required for a designated benchmark.  In addition, the amendments will create a new requirement for an assurance report that will apply to any designated benchmark that is not categorized as a commodity benchmark, a critical benchmark or an interest rate benchmark.  Subject to obtaining all necessary ministerial approvals, the amendments will come into force on May 5, 2026 and will be available on the websites of the above-noted CSA members.  The CSA, the council of securities regulators of Canada’s provinces and territories, coordinates and harmonizes regulation for the Canadian capital markets. For investor inquiries, please contact your local securities regulator.

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), together with National Competent Authorities (NCAs), has agreed supplementary deferrals that may be applied on top of the standard Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR) deferral regime for sovereign bonds. ESMA and all NCAs, except the National Bank of Slovakia (NBS), have decided to allow the following supplementary deferrals: for trades of a medium size on liquid bonds in Group 1, the publication of the volume may be omitted until the end of the trading day.  The supplementary deferrals should start applying on 4 May 2026. Background As these decisions concern sovereign bond markets, which are critical and specific to each EU Member State, it was necessary to conduct consultations with the relevant regulatory bodies and financial institutions to arrive to a common approach.  The consultations resulted in a short time between the publication of the deferrals list and the start of the new regime on 2 March 2026, potentially causing implementation issues for trading venues, investment firms and Approved Publication Arrangements (APAs). Therefore, a sufficient implementation period should be provided. In addition, to ensure a consistent application of the transparency regime, supplementary deferrals should apply from the same date, regardless of any differences in the timing of individual decisions adopted by Member States (for sovereign bonds issued by Member States), and the ESMA decision (for other sovereign bonds). Related Documents DateReferenceTitleDownloadSelect 19/02/2026 ESMA74-276584410-11245 Decision on allowing supplementary deferrals for sovereign bonds under MiFIR 19/02/2026 ESMA74-276584410-11142 List of supplementary deferrals for sovereign bonds under MiFIR

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the European Union’s (EU) financial markets regulator and supervisor, has fined the trade repository (TR) REGIS-TR, S.A. a total of EUR 1,374,000 for seven infringements under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) and the Securities Financing Transactions Regulation (SFTR).  While ESMA has sanctioned EMIR breaches in the past, this is the first enforcement case involving SFTR breaches and the highest fine imposed by ESMA on a trade repository so far. ESMA has also issued a public notice and requires REGIS-TR to bring ongoing infringements to an end.  It is important for TRs to comply with their obligations under EMIR and SFTR to ensure the quality of the TR data and protect the stability, integrity and trustworthiness of EU financial markets. The services offered by Regis-TR under EMIR and SFTR were affected by the serious issues identified by ESMA, which in particular undermined the correct implementation of the new SFTR reporting regime and compromised the confidentiality of TR data. Verena Ross, ESMA’s Chair, said:  “REGIS-TR failed to comply with its obligations under EMIR and SFTR. Data on trades made available to public authorities is essential for market surveillance, enabling early detection of exposure concentrations, cross-border risks, and changes in liquidity and leverage. Today’s decision highlights ESMA’s commitment to enforcing essential requirements that ensure transparency and contribute to well-functioning markets.  This case stems from long-lasting serious overarching issues identified at REGIS-TR. We will continue to foster a strong compliance culture, including by taking enforcement action, when appropriate.”   ESMA found that REGIS-TR did not comply with key organisational obligations laid down in EMIR and SFTR relating to adequate policies and procedures, organisational structure, and operational risk, as well as specific requirements related to confidentiality and misuse of the information. The seven breaches specifically relate to: deficiencies in REGIS-TR’s policies and procedures under both EMIR and SFTR leading, among other things, to a lack of clarity regarding the roles and responsibilities of the governing bodies; shortcomings in REGIS-TR’s organisational structure which did not ensure continuity and orderly functioning of the TR in the performance of its services and activities in relation to SFTR; the failure by REGIS-TR to identify sources of operational risk and minimise them through the development of appropriate systems, controls and procedures both in relation to EMIR and SFTR; the failure by REGIS-TR to ensure the confidentiality, integrity and protection of information received under EMIR; the failure by REGIS-TR to prevent any misuse of information received and maintained in its systems under EMIR. The breaches were found to have resulted from negligence on the part of REGIS-TR. In calculating the fine, ESMA considered aggravating and mitigating factors provided for in EMIR.  ESMA also required REGIS-TR to bring the three infringements that have not been remediated yet (related to policies and procedures under EMIR and SFTR and organisational structure for business continuity under SFTR) to an end. Related Documents DateReferenceTitleDownloadSelect 19/02/2026 ESMA43-857238790-1634 Decision to adopt supervisory measures and impose fines in respect of infringements committed by REGIS-TR S.A. 19/02/2026 ESMA43-857238790-1629 Public notice on the sanctions to Regis-TR for serious breaches of organisational obligations 19/02/2026 ESMA43-857238790-1632 ESMA sanctions Regis-TR for serious breaches of organisational obligations - Press release

Synechron, a leading digital transformation consulting firm, and Cognition today announced a strategic partnership to help global financial institutions modernize critical software faster using AI-assisted engineering. The partnership embeds Devin, the autonomous AI software engineer, into Synechron’s delivery model, building on Synechron’s extensive experience delivering solutions to a majority of the world’s largest banks. By combining certified engineers with AI agents capable of reasoning across large, complex enterprise codebases, the firms enable faster, lower-risk modernization within existing security and governance frameworks. “Our clients want proven, reliable ways to accelerate their development work,” said Mihir Shah, Synechron’s president. “Through Synechron Labs, we’ve already seen strong results across system upgrades and migration projects. By combining our domain expertise with Cognition’s AI capabilities, we’re giving financial institutions a more dependable way to modernize their technology.” With both Synechron’s and Cognition’s deep banking and insurance expertise, the partnership is designed to help financial institutions accelerate modernization while maintaining strict quality, security and governance standards. Synechron’s joint research and development with Cognition showed that Devin handled upgrades faster, made engineering easier, and improved testing, leading to clear productivity and quality gains. “Enterprises don’t just need productivity gains; they need a new operating model for engineering,” said Gardner Johnson, global VP of partnerships. “The Synechron Labs team quickly saw that Devin transforms how large systems can be understood, modernized, and evolved. By combining AI agents with deep domain expertise, we’re helping clients reimagine what’s possible across their most critical platforms.”   Partnership Impact Direct access to Devin through Synechron’s service offerings, bringing autonomous engineering capabilities directly into client modernization programs. Cognition-trained and certified engineers, ensuring responsible, compliant deployment aligned with financial-industry governance standards. Integration with Synechron’s accelerators to modernize legacy systems, refactor large-scale codebases, and accelerate time to market. Joint go-to-market programs, including enterprise pilots that take AI engineering “from theory to production-tested reality” across Java upgrades, COBOL modernization, SAS-to-PySpark migrations, and other high-impact use cases. Co-developed R&D to extend agent capabilities, including CI/CD integration and cloud-pipeline workflows.

Today, Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent announced the priorities and schedule for the 2026 G20 Finance Track, including hosting a meeting of the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors in Asheville, North Carolina.  “Thanks to President Trump’s pro-growth economic policies, the United States’ economy is reaching historic heights, and as the G20’s Finance Track lead Treasury will leverage America’s demonstrable economic success and bring the G20 back to its core mission by undertaking a streamlined, results-oriented approach for the group,” said Secretary Bessent.  “In close coordination with the State Department, we will execute on the President’s agenda for the G20 by prioritizing pro-growth economic policies through modernizing financial regulation; strengthening our understanding of excessive global imbalances; enhancing debt transparency and facilitating debt restructuring processes; endorsing a vibrant digital assets ecosystem; improving cross-border payments and addressing payments fraud and scams; and promoting financial literacy.” In posting the schedule of meetings, Secretary Bessent added: “I am proud to spotlight that the United States will host the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors in Asheville, North Carolina.  The selection of historic Asheville reflects the Trump Administration’s commitment to the revitalization and resilience of western North Carolina, which continues to rebuild after the devastating impact of Hurricane Helene.” The current schedule of in-person G20 Finance Track 2026 meetings includes: April 16 (Washington, DC): Finance ministers and central bank governors meeting. August 29-30 (Asheville, North Carolina): Finance and central bank deputies meeting. August 31 - September 1 (Asheville, North Carolina): Finance ministers and central bank governors meeting. October 15 (Bangkok, Thailand): Finance ministers and central bank governors meeting. The United States’ G20 host year will culminate with President Trump’s Leaders’ Summit on December 14-15, at Trump National Doral in Miami, Florida.

The board of the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment (CISI) is delighted to announce that three Honorary Fellowships have been awarded to: Paul Stockton Debbie Clarke CF Chartered FCSI Danny Corrigan MCSI Honorary Fellowships are awarded annually by the CISI’s Board of Trustees to individuals who have made an outstanding positive contribution, both to the financial services profession and to the CISI. Honorary Fellowship carries the designatory letters FCSI(Hon). CISI Chair, Michael Cole-Fontayn MCSI, said: “The CISI Board and I are delighted to announce our highest accolade this year is awarded to three accomplished and outstanding financial services professionals. They are consummate role models for our next generation of sector talent with their commitment to lifelong learning and the CISI community. We look forward to their inspiration and leadership over the years ahead.” Paul Stockton (above) began his career as a chartered accountant in 1988 with Price Waterhouse (PW) in Windsor specialising in financial services.  After four years Paul accepted a position with PW in New York where he worked closely with insurance and asset management companies before returning to London in 1996. In 1999 he joined Old Mutual Plc as group financial controller, becoming finance director of wealth manager Gerrard Limited in 2001. In 2005, two years after the sale of Gerrard to Barclays, he left to work initially for Euroclear and then subsequently, as a divisional finance director of the Phoenix Group. Paul joined Rathbones Group Plc as Group Finance Director in 2008, serving until becoming Managing Director of Rathbones Investment Management in May 2018. In May 2019 Paul was appointed as Group Chief Executive at Rathbones, a role he enjoyed until his retirement in September 2025, two years after completing Rathbones’ merger with Investec Wealth UK. Alongside his executive career Paul has served as a non-executive director of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme, as a board member of the Personal Investment Management and Financial Advice Association (PIMFA), and as a member of the FCA Practitioner Panel. Paul is a Freeman of the City of London. Prior to taking on a NED portfolio career Debbie Clarke CF Chartered FCSI (below) was working within financial services, corporate finance and M&A since 1996 and held a number of leadership roles within the accountancy practices where she was an equity partner. During this time she directed M&A and refinancing projects for a wide range of clients. As an adviser she worked with a wide range of investors and organisations both public and private, within the UK and internationally and has a strong regulated background. She regularly presented at industry conferences and training sessions and assisted student training and mentoring as part of her portfolio. Her experience has been across a variety of industries from education, sports, technology, real estate, manufacturing and support services where she has provided a range of strategic advice to her clients. Across her NED portfolio she has been chairing and vice chairing various board and committees and continues to advise private companies and their boards on their strategic plans. Debbie became a member of the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment (‘CISI’) in 1999 and started volunteering with CISI in 2007 when she was asked by a fellow Corporate Financier, Frank Moxon to help set up what has become the Corporate Finance & Capital Markets Forum. Working together with Frank and others for many years in relaunching the Diploma in Corporate Finance and championing professionalism in wholesale markets has been a passion during her career. She became a non-executive Director of the CISI in 2017 a post she held for six years before stepping down to focus on her Trustee role on the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment Future Foundation (‘Future Foundation ‘) which the CISI set up in 2022. In 2022 Debbie was awarded the Freedom of the City of London. Debbie has been and continues to be a mentor and supporter of many people throughout their careers in financial services. Danny Corrigan MCSI (above) is a senior manager with 40 years’ experience of the wholesale financial markets as a London based Director, Managing Director, and CEO leading teams across a range of asset classes including fixed income and derivatives. He also has extensive international experience having worked locally in the markets of Moscow, Sydney, Tokyo, and others.  He has worked as a banker, trader, and broker, for a dozen firms, has written five books on the markets and has an extensive network in the city. He has sat on various central bank committees and was seconded to London Clearing House, a crucial part of the global market infrastructure, as part of an industry wide response to the default of Lehman Brothers to lead the closure of its trading books. Danny and his co-founders launched London Reporting House, a fin-tech start-up in April 2023, has funding, wonderful employees, and a perfect little office in the alleyways of Bow Lane. He was also a Trustee and Board member of the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment and chaired its International Committee. He spent years promoting the City of London with non-for-profit promotional bodies including the Lord Mayor / Mansion House and was formerly Chair of the Eurasia Group at TheCityUK. He graduated in Economics from the University of Liverpool in 1981 and has an MBA (Finance) from City University. He is married to Kerrie, and they are proud parents of three sons; an actor James, Ben a co-founder of London Reporting House and an earlier survivor of ‘Dragon’s Den’, Luke an accomplished professional and are grandparents to Wren. Danny is a retired Football Association coach having led Hampstead FC youth teams to glory in the 2000s and he was an occasional referee. He stood for the Brexit Party in the unwinnable seat of Hornsey & Wood Green in 2019 and came 5th.

Supporting member authorities in strengthening their crisis preparedness is a pillar of the FSB’s mandate to promote global financial stability. Over 15 years of standard-setting by the Financial Stability Board (FSB), anchored in the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions and sectoral guidance, has laid a solid foundation for addressing financial crises. Several periods of turmoil have tested the resolution framework since its initial adoption in 2011. These episodes highlighted its significant benefits but also uncovered gaps in the framework and its implementation, underscoring the need for better integration with broader crisis preparedness activities. A resilient global financial system depends on the ability of authorities to respond swiftly and effectively to financial institution distress or sectoral disruptions. This, in turn, requires thorough preparation by both authorities and financial institutions in advance of any potential failure. The strategic review aims to: strengthen and, where necessary, adapt the FSB’s crisis preparedness activities to respond to changes and emerging vulnerabilities in the global financial system, drawing on lessons learnt from the crises that have occurred since the FSB’s formation in 2009. enhance the FSB’s crisis preparedness activities to consider all stages of a crisis, from early intervention measures through recovery and resolution to post-stabilisation restructuring. refine internal processes and organisational structure to achieve the FSB’s strategic objectives for crisis preparedness. strengthen the central role of the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions as the international standard for resolution regimes for financial institutions. The FSB has appointed Andrea Enria, former Chair of the Supervisory Board of the European Central Bank and the first Chair of the European Banking Authority, to lead a high-level group who will conduct the strategic review of the FSB’s crisis preparedness activities. On his appointment, Mr Enria said, “The ability to manage crises effectively is not just a technical requirement but a cornerstone of global financial stability. I am honoured to chair this strategic review of the FSB’s crisis preparedness activities, which aims to ensure that the crisis management framework remains credible and fit for purpose.” Related Information 21 January 2026 2025 Resolution Report: “From Plans to Practice: Operationalising Resolution” Foundational resolution frameworks are now mostly in place, with significant progress in operational planning and resolvability assessments. 25 April 2024Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions (revised version 2024) This version of the Key Attributes incorporates additional guidance on financial resources and tools to support the orderly resolution of a central counterparty (CCP). 10 October 2023 2023 Bank Failures: Preliminary lessons learnt for resolution Report reviews the events of March 2023 in Switzerland, the US, and the UK, the handling of distressed banks, and the implications for the effective operationalisation and implementation of the FSB’s Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institut

LSEG today launched Model-as-a-Service (MaaS), a new capability that enables financial institutions to host, distribute and analyse models through a secure and governed marketplace. Societe Generale has joined LSEG’s model marketplace as a provider of advanced analytical models, making a set of its flagship datasets and analytics available to both firms’ clients. As part of the partnership, seven Societe Generale datasets and analytics will be available via LSEG’s model marketplace, covering Fixed Income, FX, ESG, and Equities. Clients will be able to access Societe Generale’s flagship datasets and analytics alongside LSEG’s own analytics, all through a single, integrated experience. Through LSEG’s strategic partnership with Microsoft, MaaS enables portfolio managers, risk teams and other market participants to access datasets, analytics & models from multiple providers securely, and at scale, without the need for additional integration. For institutions, MaaS offers a secure, scalable route to commercialisation; turning proprietary analytics into scalable and value-driven solutions, whilst reducing infrastructure, compliance, and go-to-market overhead. Powered by Model Context Protocol (MCP) connectors, MaaS also delivers models directly into LSEG’s partners’ AI ecosystems, such as the availability of LSEG’s MCP connector in Microsoft Copilot Studio. Aysegul Erdem, Head of Modelling Solutions, LSEG, said:“We are excited to onboard Societe Generale as one of our partners and provide them a trusted route to market which allows their data and analytics to be distributed, discovered, and adopted across institutions. By combining partner models with LSEG’s trusted data and our global infrastructure, we are driving innovation and advancing the transformation of the financial model ecosystem.” Philippe Dufay, Head of Data & Research Sales, Global Markets, Societe Generale, said:“We are truly enthusiastic to partner with LSEG. This collaboration is a unique opportunity to bring our proprietary datasets and advanced analytics into a powerful platform, creating even greater value for our shared clients.” Bill Borden, Corporate Vice President, Worldwide Financial Services, Microsoft, said:“LSEG’s Model‑as‑a‑Service offering is an important step forward in helping financial institutions harness the power of advanced analytics and AI. Through Microsoft's strategic partnership with LSEG, we’re giving financial institutions a streamlined path to better insights and accelerating innovation across the industry.”

90% of the information requests received by BME’s Ombudswoman Office come from retail investors Inquiries from issuing entities grow from 2% to 8% due to high demand for certifications required to carry out corporate transactions such as tender offers The report warns of the increase in potential scams through identity theft under the false pretext of offering investment products or advice on them BME’s Ombudswoman Office published its annual report today, detailing its activity in 2025. Last year, it received roughly 1,200 calls and more than 700 emails. Once again, retail investors account for the majority of inquiries (90%, compared to 95% the previous year), while 2% of the information requests come from market members and entities (versus 3% in 2024) and 8% from issuing entities, which represents a strong increase compared to the previous year, when they accounted for 2%. The 300% increase in inquiries from issuing entities is due to the high demand for certifications required to carry out certain corporate transactions, such as tender offers. Regarding the type of information requested, market information dominates (47%). This category includes inquiries about changes in quoted securities, fees applicable to trading activity, or historical quotes of securities admitted to trading on the Spanish stock exchange. 11% of inquiries relate to inside information and other relevant information from issuers, with particular emphasis on tender offers carried out during this period, such as Neinor’s two-phase tender offer for Aedas, BBVA’s for Sabadell, or Inocsa’s for Grupo Catalana Occidente. Inquiries about shareholder remuneration and about trading suspensions and exclusions are also common. Lastly, 42% of inquiries correspond to other miscellaneous matters, including topics such as voluntary renunciation of maintaining the registration of shares in Iberclear’s registry, or shares of companies in liquidation or excluded from trading, as well as securities traded on other markets and BME’s multilateral trading systems. Once again, BME’s Ombudswoman Office has also carried out a guiding role in inquiries and complaints outside its remit, such as issues in trading on international markets, identity theft offering advisory services, or matters related to patrimonial loss for tax purposes. In addition to the inquiries received, the Office has managed 19 contentious inquiry cases. Gloria Martínez-Picazo, BME’s Ombudswoman, explains that “the Office is open to anyone with questions about the execution of transactions in the stock market, with special attention to retail investors of all ages. Year after year, we appreciate a significant increase in financial education among investors, a key factor in resolving queries and avoiding claims files.” One of the biggest risks for investors, once again this year, is potential scams involving identity impersonation by entities or firms (including BME) fraudulently offering investment services or financial advice. The report reminds us that BME never contacts individuals directly, does not offer investment services, does not request the delivery or transfer of money, and does not make investment recommendations. Additionally, the Report includes a series of recommendations aimed at strengthening personalized and individualized attention to investors by the Customer Service of the entities, and urges them to proactively cancel fees associated with excluded and unproductive securities, following CNMV recommendations, as occurred this year with the costs related to shares of Seda de Barcelona and Abengoa warrants. Lastly, it urges the investor relations departments of issuers to carry out proactive work with their shareholders, particularly when they are the object or subject of operations relevant to the issuing company and therefore to its shareholders. You can consult the report at this linkopens in a new tab.

Collaboration enables like-for-like benchmarking of market abuse detection rates  Provides regulator-ready, explainable evidence trails grounded in real-world reconstructed order book behaviour BMLL, the leading independent provider of harmonised, historical Level 3, 2 and 1 data and analytics across global equity, ETFs, futures and US equity options, today announced a partnership with Features Analytics, an AI-driven trade surveillance and market integrity analytics provider. The partnership will support Features Analytics’ development and commercialisation of new surveillance benchmarking and integrity analytics built on top of BMLL’s high-fidelity historical order book data.  Bringing market integrity analytics to life on high-precision historical order books Trade surveillance and market integrity analytics require high-quality historical order book data to reconstruct market and trading behaviour, provide context, measure risk and enable explainability.  Combining BMLL’s historical Level 3, 2 and 1 order book data and Features Analytics’ AI-driven detection approach accelerates the launch of new data products. Specifically, the collaboration enables rapid development of proprietary Features Analytics products designed to address model benchmarking and risk measurement challenges in trade surveillance.  As a result, Features Analytics’ solutions help improve surveillance precision and reduce the operational burden driven by legacy, parameter-heavy approaches, where firms can face extremely high false positives and ongoing calibration costs.  Measuring and benchmarking market abuse detection rates By developing these products, BMLL and Features Analytics open up a new category of surveillance benchmarking data that enables firms to independently measure how their incumbent surveillance stack is performing, both over time and against market conditions. This enables like-for-like benchmarking of market abuse detection rates across existing solutions, while providing regulator-ready, explainable evidence trails grounded in real-world reconstructed order book behaviour. Paul Humphrey, Chief Executive Officer of BMLL, said: “Market integrity and surveillance are a natural application layer on top of high-quality historical order book data. This partnership reflects our focus on enabling sophisticated workflows on top of BMLL data, now extending beyond market quality into market integrity and surveillance benchmarking use cases.”   Cristina Soviany, PhD, Chief Executive Officer and Co-founder of Features Analytics, added: “Our mission is to help financial institutions stay ahead of regulatory requirements with our unique eyeDES® AI technology and tools that deliver measurable coverage and accurate detection of market abuse. Access to deep, harmonised, high-quality historical order book data through BMLL’s Activate program supports faster development and validation of the new products we are bringing to market.”  Partnership anchored in Features Analytics’ participation in the ‘BMLL Activate: Data Credits Program’ Features Analytics participated in the ‘BMLL Activate: Data Credits Program’, a time-limited initiative designed to enable qualified partners to build and validate new products on top of BMLL historical order book data with no upfront data licence cost during the build period, and a clear conversion path to longer-term commercial deployment. Under the BMLL Activate program, BMLL provides Features Analytics with a BMLL data allowance (credits) redeemable against defined-scope usage of the BMLL Data Lab (Python research sandbox) and access to the BMLL Data Feed.

ASIC has issued a new information sheet for operators of employee entitlement schemes outlining our approach to regulation of these schemes under the Corporations Act 2001 (Corporations Act), commencing 1 April 2026.In November 2025, ASIC announced that operators of employee entitlement schemes will be subject to additional transparency and governance requirements and need to apply to ASIC for an Australian financial services (AFS) licence by 1 September 2026. Information Sheet 295 Employee entitlement schemes (INFO 295) explains: transitional relief that will be available for operators from 1 April 2026 until an AFS licence is granted by ASIC the process for an operator to apply for an AFS licence with the relevant authorisations by 1 September 2026, and obligations that will apply to operators under the Corporations Act and conditions of ASIC’s ongoing relief. ASIC will make a new legislative instrument in March 2026 to provide transitional and ongoing relief to operators of employee entitlement schemes from certain provisions of the Corporations Act. We will undertake targeted consultation with operators of existing schemes prior to finalising the instrument. Download Information Sheet 295 Employee entitlement schemes Background The primary objective of an employee entitlement scheme is to fund benefits payable to employees upon termination of employment, or long-service leave entitlements.Currently, operators of employee entitlement schemes have relief from the AFS licensing, managed investment and associated provisions of the Corporations Act under ASIC Corporations (Employee redundancy funds relief) Instrument 2015/1150 until 1 April 2026. ASIC is Australia’s corporate, markets and financial services regulator.

Commissioner Peirce: I am honored to be on stage today with Chairman Paul Atkins. Before we begin, let me remind you that my statements and his are our own in our official capacities and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission or our fellow Commissioner. Chairman Atkins needs little introduction, but let me give you a brief bio for him. Paul S. Atkins was sworn into office as the 34th Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 21 of last year. Prior to returning to the SEC, Chairman Atkins was most recently chief executive of Patomak Global Partners, a consulting firm he founded in 2009. Chairman Atkins previously served as a Commissioner of the SEC from 2002 to 2008. During his tenure, he advocated for transparency, consistency, and the use of cost-benefit analysis at the agency. Chairman Atkins began his career as a lawyer in New York, focusing on a wide range of corporate transactions for U.S. and foreign clients, including public and private securities offerings and mergers and acquisitions. He was resident for 2½ years in his firm’s Paris office and admitted as conseil juridique in France. A member of the New York and Florida bars, Chairman Atkins received his J.D. from Vanderbilt University School of Law and his A.B., Phi Beta Kappa, from Wofford College in 1980. Originally from Lillington, North Carolina, Chairman Atkins grew up in Tampa, Florida. He and his wife Sarah have three sons. One other interesting fact about Chairman Atkins is that he speaks German and French fluently. He likely is looking for another language to add to his repertoire. Mr. Chairman, have you considered learning Solidity? Chairman Atkins: No need. Vibe coding works just fine. It is a big step up from the BASIC-PLUS and COBOL I used in college. Commissioner Peirce: Fair point, Mr. Chairman, but if the smart contract your AI writes starts saying everything is a security, we’ll suspect AI hallucination. A few years ago, if someone had told me that I would be standing at a crypto conference with the Chairman of the SEC, I would have thought that person was hallucinating. But we’re here, so let’s get to some substance. During the past year, the SEC under the leadership of Chairman Atkins and Acting Chairman Uyeda in the early part of the year has taken a lot of steps toward crypto clarity. We have: Sought and received written responses to multiple sets of difficult questions covering a wide range of crypto topics; Held several in-depth roundtables on discrete topics including the definition of a security, trading, custody, tokenization, DeFi, and privacy; Met with many developers and builders in Washington D.C., virtually, and in crypto-on-the-road meetings in cities across the country; Provided technical assistance to Congress as it works on crypto legislation; Launched a new initiative with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to build a lasting basis for coordination and cooperation in regulating areas of joint interest, including crypto; Ended regulation by enforcement; Issued multiple staff guidance documents and frequently asked questions to help people understand what the SEC staff thinks is and is not within the SEC’s jurisdiction (including on issues like mining, staking, meme coins, and stable coins), and how regulated entities engaging with crypto can comply with our existing rules; Got rid of unhelpful staff guidance, such as SAB 121; Published a staff statement on the custody of crypto asset securities by broker-dealers; Issued a cross-divisional staff statement outlining a taxonomy for tokenized securities; Approved exchange generic listing standards for crypto ETPs; Issued staff no-action letters to several projects, including on tokenization and DePIN; and Began the process of designing rules, exemptive relief, and Commission interpretations, which will help to form the basis for a durable regulatory framework. Mr. Chairman, can you give us a preview of what to expect this year on the crypto regulatory front? Chairman Atkins: We have a lot on our plate. Not only will we continue to engage with Congress on its important efforts, but, as you noted, we will move forward with our regulatory work through Project Crypto, which is now a joint initiative with the CFTC. As you all know, one of our own, Mike Selig, who Hester brought to the SEC as Chief Counsel of the Crypto Task Force in my office, is now CFTC Chairman now. We are planning great things together – harmonization, joint rulemaking – a common, coordinated approach unlike anything seen before of these two, often sparring agencies. As for the SEC, I expect the Commission and staff to consider the following in the coming weeks and months: A Commission framework to explain how we think about crypto assets that are subject to an investment contract. How is such an investment contract formed? And how is it terminated?; An innovation exemption to facilitate limited trading of certain tokenized securities on novel platforms with an eye toward developing a long-term regulatory framework; A rulemaking proposal to establish common-sense pathways for people to raise capital in connection with the sale of crypto assets; No-action letters and exemptive orders to provide additional clarity, including to address wallets and other user interfaces that are not subject to registration under the Exchange Act; Rulemaking on custody of non-security crypto assets, including payment stablecoins, by broker-dealers; A transfer agent modernization rulemaking which will accommodate the role that blockchain can play in recordkeeping; and Additional guidance and no-action letters to help people understand how existing rules apply to their unique factual circumstances. Commissioner Peirce: Sounds like a lot of work, but for securities nerds like us, this experience is a bit like the Olympics. It’s nearly as exhilarating as hurtling downhill at 80 mph and doing acrobatics after getting big air off the ski jump or doing backflips after a quadruple lutz on ice. While not as dramatic as our talented Olympic champions, we have an unusual opportunity to consider many complex regulatory issues in light of this new technology. This task too will require some acrobatics, and we are not looking to hurt or break anything other than unwarranted regulatory impediments to technological progress. I want to talk for a minute about an innovation exemption, which has inspired hopes and fears that may need some moderation. Indeed, the way people talk about it now reminds me of the expectations that people have when they buy an abandoned storage unit; they are sure it will contain a rare work of art and a trunk full of gold bars. So too some people are certain the innovation exemption will cure all their regulatory headaches. Some people in TradFi, by contrast, seem to think that the soon-to-be-opened storage unit contains a monster that will swallow all of TradFi in one ugly bite. They fear the innovation exemption will let crypto firms ignore all the rules. Both groups are likely to realize that the innovation exemption is not as monumental as either faction anticipated. It would be an important step toward facilitating the integration of tokenized securities into our existing financial system, but it would not change the entire financial system overnight. We are working incrementally now, as we have always done. The goal is to facilitate the organic incorporation of new technology in a way that enhances the dynamism and resilience of the system so that it can serve investors, companies, and other users of capital effectively. Paul, please describe what you have in mind with the innovation exemption. Chairman Atkins: I would like to consider an innovation exemption to enable incumbents and crypto-native to experiment. For example, people trading certain tokenized securities through automated market makers, even though no one person or group of persons may be controlling that mechanism. In my view, market participants should be able to engage with decentralized applications on public, permissionless blockchains if they desire. But I expect, however, that many Americans will be more comfortable allowing intermediaries to custody and trade on their behalf. Individual investors, not the SEC, should make the decision. I also would like to consider whether there should be a safe harbor for participants who may be facilitating such trading. Specifically, I would like to consider how issuers that want to tokenize their securities could work with a transfer agent or other tokenization agent to tokenize their securities so that they can be traded onchain in AMMs or other trading systems, environments, or platforms that offer decentralized liquidity. Under this possible approach, the innovation exemption would limit trading volume and could provide relief from some of our rules and certain other requirements that may not be relevant in light of how this technology works. Buyers and sellers of the tokenized securities would go through a white-listing process. The exemption would be temporary but would last long enough for us to consider developing new rules and amending existing rules to allow such trading to continue under appropriate conditions in the future and to enable any parties that need to do so to register. I would welcome feedback on this potential approach. Commissioner Peirce: Thanks for giving us a peek into the storage locker. No Picassos, but no scary monsters either. Just an incremental step from which market participants can learn and which may help get us to a fit-for-purpose, long-term regulatory framework. Speaking of new things, you and I have both seen some demos to show us how some of this technology, such as decentralized trading, works. Has anything struck you about what you’ve seen? Chairman Atkins: One interesting aspect of the technology is the ability to embed compliance into the smart contract’s code. A company’s founders, for example, could code their commitment not to resell their securities for a certain period of time into the smart contract governing tokenized securities. Likewise, we can reimagine communications between issuers and their security-holders through the use of blockchain. And privacy-preserving technologies, such as zero-knowledge proofs, can revolutionize how we achieve the goals of the Bank Secrecy Act. Under this model, Americans would not have to relinquish their privacy wholesale to financial institutions, and these intermediaries would have lower compliance costs. Commissioner Peirce: That sounds promising. I worry a lot about how embedded financial surveillance is in our financial system. Americans have an opportunity to use this new technology to protect themselves from bad actors while also protecting our nation from our adversaries. We should take advantage of this moment to reacquaint ourselves with how important financial privacy is to the security of the American people. Now let’s address the elephant in the room: what do you think about the falling crypto prices of late? Is it time to focus our attention on this issue? Should regulators panic or even care that prices are down? Chairman Atkins: It is not the regulator’s job to worry about the daily swings of the markets; it’s our job to make sure market participants have the disclosures they need to make informed investment decisions. People whose only focus is on the number always going up are likely to be disappointed, whether they are buying stocks, precious metals, or crypto. Markets go up and markets go down in response to many factors. As regulators, the best thing we can do is to ensure that the rules governing the asset classes we regulate enable people to have the information they need to express their market sentiments through decisions about whether to buy the assets at issue. Commissioner Peirce: I agree. “Number go down” is the mantra of the moment, and some crypto critics are dancing in the streets. In German, we would call this reaction “Schadenfreude,” which translates as something like “happiness about destruction.” In this context maybe we should call their attitude Ethbelowthreeglee or Bitcoinunderseventylevity. But the best way to respond to these critics is not to look around desperately for some regulatory change that will cause the number to go up again. Sure, regulatory clarity in the form of legislation and regulation can help to create a conducive environment for building. But regulation is not the well from which value springs. You have to build stuff that people want and need. That is the best way to garner support on both sides of the aisle in Washington. If people are actually using something, government will be reluctant to take it away. Mr. Chairman, can you share some lessons from your many years of working in the capital markets about how innovators can successfully engage with the regulatory system? Chairman Atkins: I agree with you that building useful things that people want and need speaks volumes in Washington. This technology, if developed carefully, could have a transformative effect on the financial system as securities move onchain. Tokenization could transform the financial system as we know it by, for example, shortening settlement cycles, facilitating the movement of collateral and dividends, facilitating proxy voting, or making it easier for people to construct and manage bespoke, diversified portfolios of investments. We stand ready to work with entrepreneurs who are building for a better future. I hate to repeat an oft-mocked phrase from the last administration, but “Come in and talk to us.” We will not put our thumbs on the scale in favor of any particular asset or technology, nor will we become your spokesmen, but we want our markets to be open to people offering new products and services. Our rulebook should not be the barrier to innovation that would further our objectives of protecting investors, facilitating capital formation, and fostering fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Commissioner Peirce: You have captured the balance well. We are not cheerleaders of any new asset or technology, but we want our markets to welcome people who have ideas about how to improve them. The SEC has not always been very welcoming. Regulation, if done wrong, can deny the American people benefits they otherwise would enjoy. For example, an unwillingness to work productively with issuers of tokens led to the perverse result that tokens that gave no meaningful rights to their holders were less likely to attract negative regulatory attention than rights-bearing tokens. As a result, we now live in a world in which most tokens do not give their owners any rights. I would like to get to a place in which project developers would not fear to create tokens that carry some claim on revenue streams and thus are securities. Paul, what would it take to get to a place where people would create tokens that fall unashamedly into the securities bucket? Chairman Atkins: We need to continue doing what we are doing—providing clarity about how tokenized securities interact with existing regulation and how intermediaries dealing with tokenized securities can trade and custody them on behalf of their clients. This work can only be done in a collaborative fashion, and we welcome input from everyone, even crypto naysayers who are fully immersed in their Schadenfreude. I encourage people in the audience to think about what attributes a token should have to make it useful to people, and then work with us on a regulatory framework that accommodates these attributes without compromising our important regulatory objectives. But this process will take time, and innovators shouldn’t necessarily wait for these changes before they start building. While we have these bigger conversations about whether fundamental changes should be made to our rulebooks, talking to us to see if there’s a way to make the current rules work under your particular facts and circumstances may be a necessary interim step. Commissioner Peirce: Paul, you’re known for your good cheer even in the face of difficult circumstances. Any words of advice in closing for an audience that is in the throes of a challenging crypto market? Chairman Atkins: Put your nose to the grindstone and work to build things that matter. That is how you transform Schadenfreude to Freudenfreude – the sense of happiness we feel when others succeed. A little dark chocolate and Diet Coke might help too, but go easy on the Celsius and Zyn. Commissioner Peirce: Thank you, Paul.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury today released Treasury International Capital (TIC) data for December 2025.  The next release, which will report on data for January 2026, is scheduled for March 18, 2026.  The sum total in December of all net foreign acquisitions of long-term securities, short-term U.S. securities, and banking flows was a net TIC inflow of $44.9 billion.  Of this, net foreign private inflows were $32.7 billion, and net foreign official inflows were $12.2 billion. Foreign residents increased their holdings of long-term U.S. securities in December; their net purchases were $62.9 billion.  Net purchases by private foreign investors were $55.7 billion, and net purchases by foreign official institutions were $7.2 billion. U.S. residents increased their holdings of long-term foreign securities, with net purchases of $34.9 billion. After including adjustments, such as estimated foreign portfolio acquisitions of U.S. stocks through stock swaps, overall net foreign purchases of long-term securities are estimated to have been $28.0 billion in December. Foreign residents increased their holdings of U.S. Treasury bills by $9.7 billion.  Foreign resident holdings of all dollar-denominated short-term U.S. securities and other custody liabilities increased by $12.1 billion. Banks’ own net dollar-denominated liabilities to foreign residents increased by $4.8 billion. Complete data are available on the Treasury website here. ###   About TIC Data The monthly data on holdings of long-term securities, as well as the monthly table on Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities, reflect foreign holdings of U.S. securities collected primarily on the basis of custodial data.  These data help provide a window into foreign ownership of U.S. securities, but they cannot attribute holdings of U.S. securities with complete accuracy.  For example, if a U.S. Treasury security purchased by a foreign resident is held in a custodial account in a third country, the true ownership of the security will not be reflected in the data.  The custodial data will also not properly attribute U.S. Treasury securities managed by foreign private portfolio managers who invest on behalf of residents of other countries.  In addition, foreign countries may hold dollars and other U.S. assets that are not captured in the TIC data.  For these reasons, it is difficult to draw precise conclusions from TIC data about changes in the foreign holdings of U.S. financial assets by individual countries. TIC Release for February       TIC Monthly Reports on Cross-Border Financial Flows       (Billions of dollars, not seasonally adjusted)                 12 Months Through                     2024 2025 Dec-24 Dec-25 Sep Oct Nov Dec     Foreigners' Acquisitions of Long-Term Securities                                             1     Gross U.S. Sales of Domestic U.S. Securities 70193.6 89246.6 70193.6 89246.6 7764.6 8103.8 7788.7 9088.2 2     Gross U.S. Purchases of Domestic U.S. Securities 69008.8 87695.0 69008.8 87695.0 7564.2 8052.9 7571.7 9025.3 3     Domestic Securities, net U.S. sales (line 1 less line 2) /1 1184.9 1551.7 1184.9 1551.7 200.3 50.9 217.1 62.9                             4       Private, net /2 1190.3 1541.9 1190.3 1541.9 203.5 61.0 153.0 55.7 5         Treasury Bonds & Notes, net 516.6 442.7 516.6 442.7 43.7 -35.3 45.0 -20.5 6         Gov't Agency Bonds, net 127.2 112.9 127.2 112.9 15.1 20.4 -10.9 13.2 7         Corporate Bonds, net 264.3 327.8 264.3 327.8 32.5 23.0 47.5 -2.5 8         Equities, net 282.2 658.5 282.2 658.5 112.2 53.0 71.4 65.5                             9       Official, net /3 -5.5 9.8 -5.5 9.8 -3.1 -10.1 64.1 7.2 10         Treasury Bonds & Notes, net -26.8 -34.0 -26.8 -34.0 -16.3 -24.8 33.2 -21.1 11         Gov't Agency Bonds, net -44.2 -57.1 -44.2 -57.1 -5.5 5.6 -2.6 -3.6 12         Corporate Bonds, net 40.2 39.2 40.2 39.2 2.8 1.7 10.3 0.5 13         Equities, net 25.3 61.6 25.3 61.6 15.9 7.3 23.1 31.4                             14     Gross U.S. Sales of Foreign Securities 18304.9 23186.0 18304.9 23186.0 2144.0 2137.6 2071.0 2244.6 15     Gross U.S. Purchases of Foreign Securities 18713.7 23515.6 18713.7 23515.6 2171.6 2158.8 2081.4 2279.5 16     Foreign Securities, net U.S. sales (line 14 less line 15) /4 -408.8 -329.6 -408.8 -329.6 -27.6 -21.2 -10.4 -34.9 17         Foreign Bonds, net -260.3 -213.6 -260.3 -213.6 -11.7 -36.6 -21.4 -19.7 18         Foreign Equities, net -148.5 -116.0 -148.5 -116.0 -15.9 15.4 10.9 -15.2                             19     Net Long-Term Securities Transactions (lines 3 and 16): 776.1 1222.0 776.1 1222.0 172.7 29.7 206.6 28.0                             20     Other Acquisitions of Long-Term Securities, net /5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0                             21   Net Foreign Acquisition of Long-Term Securities                           (lines 19 and 20): 776.1 1222.0 776.1 1222.0 172.7 29.7 206.6 28.0                             22   Increase in Foreign Holdings of Dollar-Denominated Short-Term                           U.S. Securities and Other Custody Liabilities: /6 196.5 199.7 196.5 199.7 -8.3 21.5 -0.5 12.1 23     U.S. Treasury Bills 222.3 142.3 222.3 142.3 -21.3 21.8 0.4 9.7 24       Private, net 165.3 60.7 165.3 60.7 18.6 7.0 1.0 6.8 25       Official, net 57.0 81.6 57.0 81.6 -40.0 14.8 -0.6 2.9 26     Other Negotiable Instruments                           and Selected Other Liabilities: /7 -25.8 57.4 -25.8 57.4 13.0 -0.4 -0.8 2.4 27       Private, net -27.8 63.6 -27.8 63.6 14.9 -0.5 0.0 3.6 28       Official, net 1.9 -6.2 1.9 -6.2 -1.9 0.1 -0.8 -1.2                             29   Change in Banks' Own Net Dollar-Denominated Liabilities 243.0 -69.8 243.0 -69.8 8.6 -73.0 -1.7 4.8                             30 Monthly Net Dollar-Denominated Portfolio Inflows (lines 21, 22, and 29) /8 1215.5 1351.9 1215.5 1351.9 173.0 -21.9 204.4 44.9     of  which                   31     Private, net 1084.3 1320.2 1084.3 1320.2 197.5 -2.6 159.6 32.7 32     Official, net 131.2 31.7 131.2 31.7 -24.5 -19.2 44.9 12.2                                                         /1     Net U.S. sales = Net foreign purchases of U.S. securities (+).                 /2     Includes international and regional organizations.                 /3     The reported division of net U.S. sales of long-term securities between net sales to foreign official institutions and net sales               to other foreign investors is subject to a "transaction bias" described in Frequently Asked Questions 7 and 10.a.4 on the TIC website.   /4     Net transactions in foreign securities by U.S. residents. Foreign purchases of foreign securities = U.S. sales of foreign securities to foreigners.           Thus negative entries indicate net U.S. purchases of foreign securities, or an outflow of capital from the United States; positive entries           indicate net U.S. sales of foreign securities.                 /5     Minus estimated unrecorded principal repayments to foreigners on domestic corporate and agency asset-backed securities (zero after Jan. 2023) +          estimated foreign acquisitions of U.S. equity through stock swaps - estimated U.S. acquisitions of foreign equity through stock swaps +           increase in nonmarketable Treasury Bonds and Notes Issued to Official Institutions and Other Residents of Foreign Countries.      /6     These are primarily data on monthly changes in banks' and broker/dealers' custody liabilities. Data on custody claims are collected             quarterly and published in the TIC website.                 /7     "Selected Other Liabilities" are primarily the foreign liabilities of U.S. customers that are managed by U.S. banks or broker/dealers.     /8     TIC data cover most components of international financial flows, but do not include data on direct investment flows, which are collected           and published by the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis. In addition to the monthly data summarized here, the           TIC collects quarterly data on some banking and nonbanking assets and liabilities. Frequently Asked Question 1 on the TIC website           describes the scope of TIC data collection.    

During the week of 9 February, the global ETF industry recorded strong product activity, with 49 new ETF launches and four closures, resulting in a net increase of 45 products worldwide according to research from ETFGI. The United States led net growth with 22 new launches, followed by APAC (excluding Japan) with 13 and Europe with nine. Latin America added three products, while the Middle East and Africa saw a net increase of one. Canada recorded a net decline of three products, and Japan was unchanged. Newly launched products were predominantly actively managed and equity-focused ETFs, highlighting continued issuer demand for active and equity-based strategies. ETFGI, a prominent independent research and consultancy firm specializing in providing subscription research on trends in the global ETFs industry, reports there were 49 new product launches and 4 product closures last week in the global ETFs industry, resulting in a net increase of 45 new products.  Global ETF launches and closures: week of February 9th ETFGI is a leading independent research and consultancy firm with 14 years of experience, recognized for its expertise in subscription research, consulting services, 6 annual regional in person ETFGI Global ETFs Insights Summit  events that cover all ETFs listed globall on 81 exchanges in 63 countries, and ETF TV, covering global ETF industry trends. 

The Securities and Exchange Commission today proposed amendments to the form used by most registered investment companies to report portfolio-related information. The changes are designed to reduce reporting burdens without significantly affecting the SEC’s use of the data or the public’s ability to assess relevant information about a fund. The proposed amendments to Form N-PORT follow a review (in accordance with a Presidential Memorandum) of the amendments the Commission made to the form in 2024. The proposal considers developments that have occurred after the Commission’s adoption of those amendments. “Reducing unnecessary reporting burdens and increasing efficiency in disclosure requirements is a top priority of the Commission,” said SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins. “This proposal provides registrants additional time to file the form, refines reporting items, and reduces the frequency of public reporting of fund portfolio holdings – all the while retaining insight into funds’ portfolio-related issues.” The proposed amendments to Form N-PORT would: Provide reporting funds with an additional 15 days to file monthly reports of portfolio-related information on Form N-PORT, which is designed to reduce the potential for errors and resubmissions Reduce the publication of reports from monthly to quarterly, a change designed to protect a fund’s shareholders by reducing the risks of more frequent public disclosure, such as external parties using information about a fund’s portfolio holdings in ways that increase costs for the fund and its shareholders Modify Form N-PORT reports to streamline or remove certain reported information, including removing “Names Rule” reporting, and add information about funds with share classes that operate as exchange-traded funds In connection with the proposed amendments, but by separate action, the Commission is extending the compliance dates for those Form N-PORT reporting requirements related to the “Names Rule” under the Investment Company Act of 1940, which addresses certain investment company names. This extension will provide additional time for funds and the Commission to consider the proposed amendments to Form N-PORT and avoid certain costs associated with regulatory requirements that the Commission is proposing to eliminate. The new compliance dates are Nov. 17, 2027, for fund groups with net assets of $10 billion or more and May 18, 2028, for fund groups with less than $10 billion in net assets as of the end of their most recent fiscal year. The proposing release for Form N-PORT amendments will be published in the Federal Register, and the public comment period will remain open until 60 days after the Federal Register publication date. Resources Fact Sheet Proposed Rule Compliance Dates Extension

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday released the minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee meeting that was held on January 27–28, 2026. The minutes for each regularly scheduled meeting of the Committee are generally published three weeks after the day of the policy decision. The descriptions of economic and financial conditions contained in these minutes are based solely on the information that was available to the Committee at the time of the meeting. The minutes can be viewed on the Board’s website.

n support of the President’s AI Action Plan, the U.S. Department of the Treasury today announced the conclusion of a major public-private initiative to strengthen cybersecurity and risk management for artificial intelligence (AI) in the financial services sector. Over the course of February, Treasury will release a series of six resources developed in partnership with industry and federal and state regulatory partners to enable secure and resilient AI across the U.S. financial system. “As this Administration has made clear, it is imperative that the United States take the lead on developing innovative uses for artificial intelligence, and nowhere is that more important than in the financial sector,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. “This work demonstrates that government and industry can come together to support secure AI adoption that increases the resilience of our financial system.” The Artificial Intelligence Executive Oversight Group (AIEOG), a partnership between the Financial and Banking Information Infrastructure Committee and the Financial Services Sector Coordinating Council, brought together senior executives from financial institutions, federal and state financial regulators, and other key stakeholders. Together, participants focused on addressing identified gaps in the financial sector’s use of AI, developing practical tools that financial institutions can use to manage AI-specific cybersecurity risks while unleashing innovation. “Treasury brought public- and private-sector partners together to develop practical tools that can effect real change in the financial sector through the AIEOG,” said Cory Wilson, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Protection. “These resources are designed to help institutions, particularly small and mid-sized institutions, harness the power of AI to strengthen cyber defenses and deploy AI more securely.” Treasury will release the AIEOG deliverables in stages throughout February. The AIEOG workstreams provide a foundation for the use of AI in financial services, addressing governance, data practices, transparency, fraud, and digital identity in an integrated way. By focusing on practical implementation rather than prescriptive requirements, the resources are intended to help financial institutions adopt AI more confidently and securely, strengthening resilience and cybersecurity while supporting innovation across the sector. “Through our public-private partnership, FSSCC and Treasury have taken an important step to address complex challenges posed by AI” said William S. Demchak, PNC Chairman & CEO, and AIEOG executive member. “By clearly identifying and addressing the associated risks, financial institutions—regardless of size—are now positioned to harness the full power of this transformative technology, driving innovation and value for their clients while strengthening multiple facets of their organizations.” Through this work, Treasury advances the President’s AI Action Plan and the National Cybersecurity Strategy by strengthening the security of AI data, infrastructure, and models in the financial sector, promoting best practices for secure AI deployment, and driving adoption of American AI systems globally. 

The Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) is inviting applications for membership in its Investor Advisory Panel (IAP). The IAP is an independent advisory panel of experts in investor issues from across Canada that advises CIRO in the development of regulatory policy, annual priorities, strategic plans, and other regulatory initiatives. The mandate of the IAP is to assist CIRO in the effective fulfillment of its public interest mandate and to convey issues of concern to investors for consideration by CIRO. All members of the IAP are appointed for a minimum of two years. For more information visit: Investor Advisory Panel (IAP). Who should apply? We will take into consideration candidates’ relevant expertise, skills and experience on matters of investor protection, concerns, issues and/or rights. We seek members with diverse experiences, perspectives, backgrounds, knowledge, and geographic representation. Individuals who are employed by a CIRO Member or who serve on CIRO Hearing Panels are not eligible to apply. When submitting your application, please include: Experience with investor issues as it relates to your previous and/or existing role(s) (e.g., academic, investor/consumer advocate, financial educator, investor, public policy, retired industry members or regulators, etc.). Experience with investor issues as it relates to specific products and/or business models. (e.g. crypto, fintech) Any relevant regulatory experience. Specific skills or experience relating to investor issues or specific investor groups (e.g., legal, research, on-line trading, new or younger investors, underserved investors, vulnerable investors, etc.). Details regarding any existing or potential, actual or perceived conflicts of interest between your private interests and your potential future responsibilities as a member of CIRO’s IAP. We welcome and encourage applicants to self-identify if they belong to historically underrepresented and/or marginalized groups including those who identify as women or non-binary/gender non-conforming, Indigenous Peoples, persons with disabilities (visible or invisible) and, members of visible minorities, racialized groups and the 2SLGBTQ+ community. While this information will be helpful to us in trying to achieve diversity of representation on CIRO’s IAP, it is completely voluntary. Selection process Membership applications will be reviewed, and selected applicants will be interviewed. The decision on selection of the CIRO IAP members will be made by the CIRO Board Governance Committee. Where to send applications Interested parties are invited to submit their resume, indicating their relevant skills and experience. Applications will be accepted until March 31, 2026. Applications should be sent by email to: officeoftheinvestor@ciro.ca.