New premium service positions Puro.earth as leading in the development of on-demand issuance for CDR Builds on MyPuro 2.0 and Puro dMRV Connect API to improve liquidity, predictability and operational readiness for industrial-scale carbon removal projects. Puro.earth, the leading crediting platform for engineered carbon dioxide removal (CDR), today announced the launch of Puro Issuance Plus, a new premium service designed to help scaled suppliers bring verified carbon removals to market more frequently through the issuance of CO₂ Removal Certificates (CORCs). Puro Issuance Plus enables more frequent, batch-based issuance cycles when suppliers need them, reducing the time between production and credit availability. By shortening issuance cycles, the service helps suppliers convert removed CO₂ into revenue faster, supporting improved cash flow, planning certainty and market responsiveness. With Puro Issuance Plus, Puro.earth is leading the carbon removal market towards on-demand issuance. Issuances remain strictly based on completed third-party audits and verified volumes, with no changes to Puro.earth’s certification, verification or crediting requirements. The launch builds directly on the recent releases of MyPuro 2.0 and the Puro dMRV Connect API, further strengthening Puro.earth’s infrastructure for scaled carbon removal. “Predictability and timing matter just as much as volume in a maturing market,” said Jan-Willem Bode, President of Puro.earth. “Puro Issuance Plus is about aligning issuance more closely with how mature suppliers actually operate - shortening the path from production to issued CORCs, and ultimately to revenue." From Digital Infrastructure to Issuance Readiness Puro Issuance Plus is enabled by MyPuro 2.0 and Puro.earth’s expanding digital products, including Puro dMRV Connect - an API that enables dMRV data flows. By combining structured data submission, audit readiness and streamlined issuance workflows, the service reduces friction between submission, verification and issuance to accelerate credit availability while maintaining Puro.earth’s high-integrity standards. Who Puro Issuance Plus is for Puro Issuance Plus is available to suppliers that meet defined eligibility criteria, including: Industrial-scale production, with a minimum issuance threshold of 1,000 CORCs per audit Consistent operational and audit performance Full compliance with Puro.earth’s quality, verification and data requirements The service is particularly relevant for suppliers seeking to optimise liquidity, improve issuance predictability, and build readiness for future real-time issuance models.

Aeron Sequencer, currently in late‑stage development, is designed to enable the delivery of resilient, highly performant distributed trading systems at scale. It provides out-of-the-box application infrastructure, significantly accelerating and de-risking development of large-scale, complex platforms for broker-dealers and exchanges. Adaptive, the leader in custom trading technology solutions, today announced it is developing Aeron Sequencer, a software infrastructure platform designed to tackle the most persistent challenges in modern trading system development: consistency, scalability, performance, and availability. Delivering on these requirements demands niche expertise, large-scale investment, and extended delivery timelines. When done poorly, the consequences can be severe—from regulatory compliance issues to an inability to compete. With the growing demands of 24/7 markets, these challenges are becoming more complex, forcing financial firms to confront a critical issue: their most talented engineers are spending less time on business innovation and more time on foundational infrastructure. This is where sequenced architectures excel. Unlike some legacy or microservice architectures that use an eventually consistent paradigm, sequenced architectures are a superior way to build institutional trading systems because they are built on a single, global sequence of events. This approach simplifies development, ensures consistency and auditability. Aeron Sequencer is a great fit for the needs of broker-dealers and exchanges, providing out-of-the-box application infrastructure to deliver complex, high-performance platforms at speed. By cleanly separating infrastructure from business functionality, Aeron Sequencer enables faster delivery, reduces operational risk, and helps firms remain competitive in an increasingly demanding, always-on market.At its core, Aeron Sequencer uses a replicated state machine architecture with a globally ordered, highly available message log. It’s capable of processing millions of messages per second at microsecond latency, freeing development teams from the complexity of building and operating this foundational layer themselves. Key benefits and features that are being developed include: Performance and reliability: Processes millions of messages per second at microsecond latency, with automatic failover and 24/7 operation. Consistency and auditability: Designed to provide global ordering and a persistent audit trail for compliance and regulatory reporting. Deployment and flexibility: Supports both cloud-native and on-premises environments, with active/active and active/passive availability modes. Systems can operate truly 24×365 with zero downtime for releases. Developer productivity: Isolates business logic into separate services, allowing development teams to own their specific domains and release on their own schedules. Matt Barrett, CEO at Adaptive, said: “Markets are in a period of rapid change, as risk and volatility intensify and changes to global market structure look increasingly likely. Aeron Sequencer is being developed to empower organisations such as broker dealers, exchanges and others, to meet these challenges by de-risking complex tech infrastructure projects and empowering development teams. By providing best-in-class quality attributes for resiliency, performance, and consistency, we enable our clients to own their innovation and build differentiated trading solutions that allow them to capitalize on increasing trading volumes and scale in response to a changing market.” Martin Thompson, Co-creator of Aeron and Chief Architect at Adaptive, adds: “Building resilient distributed systems at scale is a huge challenge. Aeron Sequencer is a game-changer because it brings replicated state machine architectures to capital markets, offering a complete solution for teams to collaborate independently, streamline testing, and ensure total ordering and auditability—all without the complexity of traditional distributed infrastructure. It’s built on proven Aeron technology, already trusted by dozens of leading capital markets firms, so teams can build and deploy with confidence.” Availability & Contact Information:Aeron Sequencer is in late-stage development for deployment in both cloud and on-premises environments.To express interest in early‑access, join the waitlist: visit https://aeron.io/aeron-sequencer

CME Group, the world's leading derivatives marketplace, today announced today announced that its metals complex reached a new single-day record of 3,338,528 contracts on January 26, up 18% from the previous daily record of 2,829,666 contracts on Friday, October 17, 2025. "Amid ongoing macro-economic uncertainty, record volatility and heightened price risk, clients are turning to our markets to hedge and adjust precious metals exposure to meet their trading goals," said Jin Hennig, Managing Director and Global Head of Metals at CME Group. "Our expanding range of precious metal contracts provide clients of all sizes efficient access to right-sized risk management tools." Growing demand for CME Group's precious metals contracts drove the record trading day, with Micro Silver futures trading a daily record volume of 715,111 contracts and record open interest of 35,702 contracts. It was also a top five trading day for Silver futures, Micro Gold futures and 1-Ounce Gold futures.  CME Group recently announced that it will launch 100-Ounce Silver futures to meet record retail demand on February 9, 2026, pending regulatory review. For more information, please visit https://www.cmegroup.com/100-oz-silver. CME Group's metals complex is listed on and subject to the rules of COMEX. For more information, please visit www.cmegroup.com/metals

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to facilitate cooperation and exchange of information for the recognition of central counterparties (CCPs) established in India and supervised by RBI. This agreement marks a significant step towards restoring access for EU clearing members to Indian central counterparties and follows two years of sustained engagement between ESMA and RBI. It reflects ESMA’s strong commitment to international supervisory cooperation and mutual support to advance safe, resilient and open financial markets. Next steps The MoU is a key requirement under Article 25 of the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) for the recognition by ESMA of third-country CCPs. It allows the Clearing Corporation of India Ltd (CCIL), a CCP established in India and supervised by RBI, to re-apply for recognition under EMIR.  ESMA is also continuing discussions with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the International Financial Services Centres Authority (IFSCA) to conclude similar cooperation arrangements.

Periodic review for the BIST Sustainability Themed Debt Securities Indices regarding BIST Sustainability Themed Debt Securities Methodology has been finalized. It has been decided to implement the changes listed in the annex for the Index Period from February 1, 2026 to April 30, 2026. (Please click for the changes listed in the annex.)

The Egyptian Exchange (EGX) announces that the following semi-annual indices review changes will become effective on Sunday, 1 February 2026. Click here for full details.

ACER issues today its guidance on the information to be voluntarily submitted for the monitoring of operational reliability performance indicators related to cybersecurity in the electricity sector, under the Cybersecurity Network Code. Who is this guidance for? This guidance is addressed to stakeholders in the electricity sector, including transmission and distribution system operators (TSOs and DSOs), generators, organised markets, nominated electricity market operators (NEMOs) and balancing responsible parties, as well as providers of critical information and communication technology (ICT) services and managed security services. Why does it matter? The operational reliability performance indicators for cybersecurity will measure how effectively electricity sector companies protect their digital systems and mitigate cybersecurity risks to cross-border electricity flows. They will track statistical data on high and critical-impact cyber-attacks, reportable cyber-threats and exploited unpatched vulnerabilities. By submitting the requested data, stakeholders will allow ACER to monitor trends and assess how cybersecurity performance evolves across the EU electricity sector. What information is ACER requesting? ACER is requesting the following statistical information, as defined by the operational reliability performance indicators listed in the guidance: annual number of reportable cyber threats; annual number of reportable cyber-attacks; and annual number of exploited unpatched (zero day) vulnerabilities. What’s the timeline to submit the information? Starting in 2027, ACER will open a submission window once every three years. In the first submission window in 2027, ACER will request data for 2026. From 2030 onwards, each submission will cover the three preceding years. Unless communicated otherwise, the submission window will be open each reporting year from 15 January to 1 March. What are the next steps? To facilitate data collection, ACER will provide access to a secure online tool. More detailed instructions will be made available prior to the first submission window. Looking ahead, ACER will use this collected data (after careful aggregation to protect sensitive information) as an input to its triannual reporting, supporting EU-level monitoring and informing future efforts to strengthen the EU cyber resilience. Access the guidance.

Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited (HKEX) is pleased to announce today (Tuesday) it has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with B3, Brazil’s stock exchange operator, to promote sustainable finance and the development of carbon markets in their respective regions. The MOU underscores HKEX’s commitment to supporting the global transition to a low-carbon economy, and extends the Group’s sustainability partnerships to South America, a region of significant importance to global climate solutions. Under the agreement, HKEX and B3 will work together to advance carbon market development and explore opportunities in commodities in Hong Kong and Brazil, and will establish regular communication channels to deepen collaboration. The two exchanges will also explore potential for cross listings of equities in HKEX and B3, while identifying new carbon and ESG product opportunities across Asia and South America. HKEX Chief Sustainability Officer, Paul Chow, said: “We are delighted to enter into this MOU with B3, a global leader among financial market infrastructure groups. This partnership builds on the foundation we’ve established through our carbon marketplace, Core Climate, and underscores HKEX’s ongoing commitment to advancing sustainable finance across regions globally. We look forward to working closely with B3 to support the continued development of international carbon standards, encourage innovation and drive meaningful progress towards a low-carbon economy through cross-border collaboration.” B3 Director of International Business Development for Asia and Oceania, Sérgio Gullo, said: “Cooperating with HKEX strengthens B3’s position as a driving force in the transition to a sustainable economy, while opening new opportunities for the Brazilian market in the international arena. Expanding our international presence positions us within the global sustainable finance market and enables companies to access ESG products. B3 remains committed to fostering an innovative, transparent, and sustainable business environment, contributing to the development of solutions that combine economic growth with environmental responsibility.” HKEX is committed to expanding its sustainable finance footprint and helping to develop transparent, inclusive, and globally connected carbon markets. By deepening ties with B3 and expanding its sustainable finance initiatives, HKEX is further positioning itself as a connector of markets, fostering innovation and cross-border collaboration to build a more resilient and inclusive financial ecosystem. HKEX Group General Counsel & Group Chief Sustainability Officer Paul Chow (right) and B3 Director of International Business Development for Asia and Oceania, Sérgio Gullo (left) signed the MOU in HKEX's Connect Hall.  From right to left: The Commissioner for Belt and Road, Nicholas Ho, HKEX Group General Counsel & Group Chief Sustainability Officer, Paul Chow, B3 Director of International Business Development for Asia and Oceania, Sérgio Gullo, HKEX Head of Carbon & ESG Products, Ken Chiu. 

The FCA has launched a review into the implications of advanced AI on consumers, retail financial markets and regulators. The Review will be led by Sheldon Mills and builds on the FCA’s existing work on AI. This includes its AI Discussion Paper, AI Sprint, and AI Lab including AI Live Testing and its groundbreaking Supercharged Sandbox supported by NVIDIA. AI is already embedded across financial services. Rapid advances in generative, agentic and emerging forms of AI mean the next phase of change could be profound, having the power to reshape markets, change the way firms compete and how consumers use retail financial services. Sheldon Mills said: 'AI is already shaping financial services, but its longer-term effects may be more far-reaching. This review will consider how emerging uses of AI could influence consumers, markets and firms, looking towards 2030 and beyond. 'By taking a forward-looking view, the review will help the FCA continue to support innovation while promoting the safe and trusted adoption of AI in retail financial services.' The FCA is seeking views on 4 interrelated themes: How AI could evolve in the future, including the development of more autonomous and agentic systems. How these developments could affect markets and firms, including changes to competition and market structure and UK competitiveness. The impact on consumers, including how consumers will be influenced by AI but also influence financial markets through new expectations. How financial regulators may need to evolve to continue ensuring that retail financial markets work well. While wholesale markets and broader societal impacts are out of scope, the Review recognises that developments in these areas may indirectly influence retail financial services and will be considered where relevant. The FCA is also separately doing extensive work on the impact of AI in wholesale markets, in particular through our live testing partnership. Feedback will shape a series of recommendations to be reported to the FCA Board in summer 2026, informing how the FCA can guide and respond to AI-driven transformation. This will culminate in an external publication. The deadline for comments is Tuesday 24 February 2026. Any other contributions can be sent to us at TheMillsReview@fca.org.uk. Basckground The engagement paper sets out the scope of the review and invites views from stakeholders including firms, consumer groups, tech providers and academics on 4 key themes. The FCA’s approach to artificial intelligence is grounded in its principles-based regulatory framework, including the Consumer Duty. This ensures outcomes-focused regulation that supports innovation while safeguarding consumers. The FCA launched its AI Lab in 2024 to deepen understanding of AI technologies and their implications for financial services. The Lab works with industry, academia, and other regulators to explore responsible AI adoption. This work forms part of the FCA’s wider commitment to leading thinking globally on the responsible adoption of advanced technologies in financial services, and to ensuring that the UK remains a trusted, competitive and resilient financial centre in the age of AI. The FCA does not plan to introduce AI-specific regulation. It will continue to rely on its existing, principles-based regulatory framework while considering how regulators need to evolve as AI becomes more embedded in financial services. Find out more information about the FCA.

Eurosystem to accept marketable assets issued in central securities depositories (CSDs) using distributed ledger technology (DLT) as eligible collateral for Eurosystem credit operations as of 30 March 2026 Further work is exploring ways to expand eligibility to assets issued and settled entirely on DLT networks Decision reflects Eurosystem’s commitment to innovation and fosters technological progress in European financial markets The Eurosystem will accept marketable assets issued in CSDs using DLT-based services as eligible collateral for Eurosystem credit operations as of 30 March 2026. Like other marketable assets, they must comply with Eurosystem collateral eligibility criteria and collateral management requirements. These criteria include availability for settlement in eligible securities settlement systems, which must be compliant with the CSD Regulation and reachable via TARGET2-Securities (T2S). These assets will be mobilised as collateral in line with the Eurosystem’s existing collateral management practices, like any other marketable asset. The Eurosystem will continue to align its collateral framework and collateral management practices with technological advancements in financial markets and support the adoption of innovative solutions, while upholding the principles of adequacy of collateral, safety, efficiency and a level playing field. To this end, the Eurosystem has launched an ambitious work plan to explore if, how and under what criteria assets issued using DLT and not represented in eligible securities settlement systems could become eligible and be mobilised as Eurosystem collateral in the future. To accelerate the transformation of Eurosystem monetary policy implementation for the digital era, a staggered approach is envisaged. Under this approach, subsets of DLT-based assets could gradually become eligible and be mobilised. The approach will take into account market developments, in particular regarding the issuance of DLT-based assets, as well as legal and regulatory developments, for example in the CSD Regulation, the DLT Pilot Regime Regulation, the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR) and securities laws of jurisdictions in the euro area. These decisions reflect the Eurosystem’s continued commitment to encouraging innovation and technological progress, thus enhancing market efficiency, and contributing to the integration of European capital markets.

Over 160 participating companies originating from 22 countries, making this year’s cohort the largest ever Dedicated aerospace and defence track introduced, IPOready Defence, reflecting Euronext’s commitment to supporting European strategic autonomy New global partner: the European Investment Bank (EIB) joins IPOready alongside INSEAD, the academic partner, and more than 80 partners and sponsors Euronext, the leading European market infrastructure, today announces the launch of the 2026 edition of its pre-IPO programme IPOready. Building on its unparalleled track record, IPOready is the largest and most comprehensive pre-IPO programme in Europe, now entering its eleventh year.  Mathieu Caron, Head of Primary Markets at Euronext, said: “The 2026 IPOready cohort sets a new benchmark as over 160 companies join the programme. This year’s cohort stands out for both its scale and quality, with a notably strong representation from strategic sectors, including over 20% from aerospace and defence. IPOready continues to equip Europe’s most ambitious companies with the capabilities and network required for IPO success, reaffirming our commitment to supporting Europe’s innovative and strategically important industries. “ The 2026 cohort is composed of more than 160 companies originating from 22 countries, with a total combined annual revenue of €29 billion and representing 140,000 employees. This year’s cohort reflects the programme’s appeal to high-growth start-ups, scale-ups and unicorns, and confirms Euronext’s position as the listing venue of choice in Europe for international fast-growing and ambitious companies.   Tech companies continue to be strongly represented in the IPOready cohort, with 69% of participating companies coming from technology-related industries (TMT 43%, Healthtech 17%, Cleantech 9%). This trend reflects Euronext’s position as Europe’s leading exchange for Tech listings, with over 700 technology companies listed and 36% of new listings in 2025 coming from the sector. Since its inception, IPOready has supported over 1,200 alumni, resulting in 39 successful listings on Euronext markets. These companies have raised more than €1.8 billion at listing, achieving a combined market capitalisation of nearly €7 billion. In 2025 alone, seven IPOready alumni listed on Euronext markets. IPOready Defence, a new dedicated track for aerospace and defence companies  IPOready offers a tailored six-month training programme providing participants with a comprehensive roadmap to IPO readiness, with expert-led workshops covering the IPO process, equity story, financial communication, legal considerations, corporate governance and post-listing obligations. Companies also benefit from extensive individual coaching sessions with audit firms, lawyers, communication specialists and investor relations specialists providing customised advice.  Building on Euronext’s set of new ESG focused initiatives designed to strengthen Europe’s strategic autonomy and technological sovereignty, IPOready 2026 introduces a dedicated track for the more than 30 aerospace and defence companies participating in this year’s programme. The track will feature an aerospace and defence IPO case study, sectorial workshops and networking opportunities with IPOready peers and Euronext-listed aerospace and defence companies.  IPOready also welcomes the European Investment Bank (EIB) as a global partner, aligned with Euronext in supporting companies to access capital and scale their growth. The EIB joins INSEAD, Euronext’s renowned academic partner and global leader in executive education, and a network of 80+ local partners and sponsors. The leading equity listing venue in Europe In 2025, Euronext confirmed its position as the leading European primary markets venue with over 1,900 issuers representing €6.8 trillion in aggregated market capitalisation on its single stock market covering eight European countries (including Greece, following the successful acquisition of a majority stake in the Athens Stock Exchange in November 2025). Euronext is the venue of choice for ambitious global champions on its markets, having welcomed 42% of international equity listings1 across Europe in 2025.  International listings refer to listings from companies with operational headquarters located in a country where a given exchange does not operate a listing venue.  

Avelacom, the global provider of ultra-low latency network and infrastructure solutions, is expanding its presence in Argentina, enabling banks and other financial institutions to connect directly to Argentina’s equities and derivatives markets for real-time market data and order execution. As part of this expansion, Avelacom is launching a new PoP at BYMA’s data center in Buenos Aires and adding new low latency routes across Latin America’s west coast (via Chile) and east coast (via Brazil), providing fast and resilient access to the US and other global markets. Avelacom has operated in Latin America since 2021, initially supporting global market making firms in expanding their trading activities on the Brazilian Exchange (B3). The new Buenos Aires PoP and expanded regional routes further strengthen Avelacom’s connectivity footprint and open access to Argentina’s rapidly developing capital markets. Comments Aleksey Larichev, CEO of Avelacom: “Argentina is our natural next step in strengthening our presence in the region. Our clients are showing increasing interest in arbitrage and market making strategies involving Argentina, Brazil and the US. With our new PoP at BYMA and expanded regional routes, we are enabling the lowest latency to BYMA’s matching engine and supporting the growth of cross-market trading across the region. Our goal for the next year is to interconnect Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Peru, giving even more opportunities to expand their trading strategies using our ultra-low latency infrastructure.” In recent years, trading volumes on the BYMA exchange have risen significantly, showing increased investor engagement and liquidity. In 2025, fresh daily records were hit in number of trades (+45% yoy) and number of orders (+58% yoy) on the exchange. At the same time, the S&P Merval Index (Argentina's flagship equity index) has seen strong nominal gains, up over 1300% in the last three years. The Argentine capital market is still significantly underpenetrated. In 2024, the market cap-to-GDP ratio was 14%, half of the Latin American average (28%). Comments María José Del Boca, Chief Product & Client Officer at BYMA: “Avelacom’s arrival into our ecosystem supports a new wave of international clients interested in trading Argentina’s securities, as well as local participants seeking to enhance their strategies across Latin America. This partnership aligns with our long-term vision to position Argentina as a market equipped with sophisticated infrastructure, including low latency connectivity and co-location solutions.”

Key takeaways: Digital asset investment products recorded US$1.73bn in outflows, the largest since mid-November 2025. Outflows were concentrated in the US at nearly US$1.8bn, while Switzerland, Germany, and Canada saw inflows. Bitcoin and Ethereum led outflows at US$1.09bn and US$630m respectively, signalling broad-based negative sentiment, although Solana saw inflows of US$17.1m, bucking the trend. The full research features in CoinShares’ weekly newsletter, which can also be found here.

BISON, the crypto trading platform backed by Boerse Stuttgart Group, has surpassed one million active users - underscoring its position as a leading crypto trading platform “made in Germany.” The combination of fee-free trading and regulated custody makes BISON the platform of choice for anyone looking to invest in cryptocurrencies simply and reliably and securely hold their coins in Germany. More than one million active users trust BISON for crypto trading and regulated custody. With this milestone, the trading platform, part of Boerse Stuttgart Group, strengthens its role as Germany’s leading provider for secure, regulated access to the crypto market - backed by more than 160 years of financial market expertise and the largest digital business built by any European exchange group. The platform delivers a regulated and secure gateway to the crypto market in Germany, offering a simple and trustworthy way for users to enter the world of crypto. BISON continues to pursue not only growth but also the highest security standards: its crypto assets are held in fiduciary custody by Boerse Stuttgart Digital Custody GmbH, a regulated subsidiary of Boerse Stuttgart Group. The company is headquartered in Germany and became the first German crypto provider to receive the MiCAR license from the country’s financial regulatory authority (BaFin). In addition, the platform holds ISO certification, includes comprehensive insurance for coins in cooperation with Munich Re Group, and uses a multi-layered security system. Compared to the previous year, BISON grew its number of active users by around 13 percent. Demand for secure, regulated, fee-free crypto trading in Germany remained strong. Especially on days when Bitcoin reached new all-time highs, BISON recorded up to six times more new customer registrations than on typical trading days. “When we founded BISON in 2019, crypto was still completely unknown to many people in Germany. At the time, Bitcoin was around €2,900. Today, crypto’s become an integral part of the financial world. More than a million people use BISON now, which marks a major milestone in our mission to advance cryptocurrency adoption in Germany,” says Dr. Ulli Spankowski, Co-Founder & CEO of BISON. “The steady growth in our user numbers shows that interest in regulated crypto offerings in Germany continues to rise. From day one, our goal has been to make access to cryptocurrencies simple, secure, and reliable, and we remain committed to that same direction. The past seven years have been a success story shaped by the entire team.” BISON currently offers access to over 50 cryptocurrencies and more than 2,500 securities, with high security standards and a clear regulatory framework. The crypto trading platform is available to users from 72 nations and has been repeatedly recognized for its user-friendliness and transparency.

Leading regulated digital prime broker GCEX (GCEX Group) has appointed Carmen Tan to lead GCEX MENA. Based in Dubai, Carmen will focus on spearheading growth opportunities for the VARA regulated entity and delivering exceptional service to institutional clients. As a fluent Mandarin and Cantonese speaker, Carmen’s remit extends beyond Managing Director of the MENA region to also drive market expansion in Asia. Carmen Tan is a growth strategy expert with experience from both the crypto and FX industries. She joins from CoinW Exchange in Dubai where, as Global Strategy & Growth Manager, she systematically scaled each of her own-sourced institutional clients, while managing a team of eight senior institutional sales professionals to accelerate growth across the Middle East, Europe and South East Asia. Just over one year later, she was appointed as Chief Communications Officer, where she significantly boosted user conversion metrics and represented the company as a key note speaker and panellist at major blockchain and crypto industry events. Prior to CoinW, Carmen spent almost two years at MultiBank Group, latterly as Regional Marketing & Growth Lead, based in Dubai, with a focus on expanding the institutional client base across Asia. Carmen is passionate about the importance of operating robust processes within a regulated framework, and has completed rigorous training and qualifications in Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter-Terrorism Financing (CTF) compliance. Lars Holst, Founder and CEO, GCEX commented, “Carmen has delivered impressive results and built very strong networks in both the MENA and Asia regions. We are delighted to welcome her to the team to help us deliver our ambitious growth plans and strengthen our position as a trusted, regulated digital prime broker for institutional and professional clients worldwide.” Carmen Tan said, “I first came to know GCEX while working at MultiBank, a long-standing GCEX client, and this gave me real insight into the strength and credibility of both the team and the offering. This is an excellent time to be joining GCEX - institutions are now recognising crypto as a legitimate asset class, and market infrastructure and custody standards have matured significantly. GCEX’s regulated, risk-averse approach strongly aligns with my own values. My focus will be on governance and growth, working closely with Lars to build a dynamic, scalable team and position GCEX as a market leading digital asset prime broker in the region.” GCEX Group empowers institutional and professional clients to access deep liquidity in CFDs on digital assets and FX, alongside spot trading and conversion of digital assets. The company also offers a comprehensive range of Forex brokerage and crypto-native technology solutions under its XplorDigital suite. XplorDigital features, its recent XplorDigital App, innovative plug-and-play solutions, ‘Crypto in a Box’ and ‘Broker in a Box’ which encompass technology-agnostic platforms - supporting regulatory requirements - covering trusted custody solutions, staking solutions, tier 1 and deep liquidity, connectivity to the biggest price makers, advanced risk management, and innovative technology partnerships. Headquartered in London, with multiple offices across the globe, GCEX is regulated by the UK’s FCA,  is authorised and regulated by the Danish Financial Supervisory Authority (Finanstilsynet) as a Crypto-Asset Service Provider under the EU Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) and as a Currency Exchange and has a Virtual Asset Service Provider license by the Dubai Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority. True Global Ventures are investors in GCEX. For further information, please visit www.gc.exchange or LinkedIn  

LSEG announces it has purchased the following number of its ordinary shares of 679/86 pence each from Citigroup Global Markets Limited ("Citi") on the London Stock Exchange as part of its share buyback programme, as announced on 04 November 2025. Date of purchase: 26 January 2026 Aggregate number of ordinary shares purchased: 167,800 Lowest price paid per share: 8,620.00p Highest price paid per share: 8,828.00p Average price paid per share: 8,690.37p   LSEG intends to cancel all of the purchased shares. Following the cancellation of the repurchased shares, LSEG has 508,383,083 ordinary shares of 679/86 pence each in issue (excluding treasury shares) and holds 21,451,599 of its ordinary shares of 679/86 pence each in treasury. Therefore, the total voting rights in the Company will be 508,383,083. This figure for the total number of voting rights may be used by shareholders (and others with notification obligations) as the denominator for the calculation by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, the Company under the FCA's Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules. In accordance with Article 5(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 (the Market Abuse Regulation) (as such legislation forms part of retained EU law as defined in the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, as implemented, retained, amended, extended, re-enacted or otherwise given effect in the United Kingdom from 1 January 2021 and as amended or supplemented in the United Kingdom thereafter), a full breakdown of the individual purchases by Citi on behalf of the Company as part of the buyback programme can be found at: http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/4406Q_1-2026-1-26.pdf This announcement does not constitute, or form part of, an offer or any solicitation of an offer for securities in any jurisdiction. Schedule of Purchases Shares purchased:       167,800 (ISIN: GB00B0SWJX34) Date of purchases:      26 January 2026 Investment firm:         Citi Aggregate information: Venue Volume-weighted average price Aggregated volume Lowest price per share Highest price per share Turquoise 8,689.81 2,800 8,636.00 8,724.00 London Stock Exchange 8,690.38 165,000 8,620.00 8,828.00

ASIC is tracking major shifts across Australia’s financial system as pressures on consumers, markets and businesses intensify. In 2026, continued cost‑of‑living strains for vulnerable Australians, rising debt and ongoing geopolitical tensions are adding volatility and uncertainty. At the same time, rapid advances in AI are transforming financial services—and fuelling a surge in AI‑powered cybercrime that is testing the resilience of companies and undermining public trust in AI‑driven decisions. Market structure is continuing to evolve, with private markets expanding and digitalisation accelerating. Meanwhile, changes to ASX governance requirements may reshape how listed companies operate, influencing transparency and market confidence. Global regulatory settings are also diverging, creating growing fragmentation that makes compliance more complex and increases the risk of uneven consumer protections. These system‑wide forces cut across all sectors ASIC regulates. Highlighting the key issues for 2026 helps direct attention to where risks are most likely to emerge and underscores where ASIC is focused to safeguard trust, integrity and confidence in Australia’s financial system. The issues outlined are not ranked. Increased retail client exposure to private credit markets Retail access to private credit and other private market products is expanding, with investment thresholds as low as ~$2,000, and investment platforms (including superannuation) enabling participation in inherently less transparent and in some case more complex products. This raises risks of mis‑selling, unsuitable product selection, and decision‑making without adequate disclosure. As ASIC identified in November (REP 821), private markets are opaque, and Australia has limited regulatory reporting outside superannuation, meaning constrained supervision and potential heightened risks for investors. Operational failures by superannuation fund trustees leading to member harm Member services problems like delays in processing claims, inadequate support and services for customers, poor IT infrastructure and cyber resilience, and escalating risks of fraud and scam activity all underscore superannuation fund operations as a key issue for ASIC in 2026. Those operational failures by trustees or administrators can result in significant financial losses, compound distress for people facing difficult circumstances, and of course erode trust in the system as a whole. With nearly three million Australians set to become eligible to access their superannuation over the next decade—and more than $750 billion expected to move from accumulation into retirement—it is essential that the superannuation system is prepared to manage potential operational challenges. Consumers losing their retirement savings through investments in high-risk products, including as a result of high-pressure sales tactics and inappropriate financial advice Aggressive marketing, lead‑generation and “cookie‑cutter” advice models have been driving switches of superannuation into complex, high‑risk investments that are often unsuitable for average consumers, for example through certain managed investment schemes. ASIC is working closely with government and consumer groups to address legal and regulatory gaps, and deliver education campaigns to empower Australians to better identify risks to their retirement savings. While the pathway to compensation can be uncertain when these schemes collapse, ASIC has 12 court cases underway related to the Shield and First Guardian matters to hold people and organisations to account. Advanced technology harming consumers (including agentic AI) We are increasingly seeing consumers face risks from automated decisions, AI-driven interactions, and scams amplified by technology. The rapid adoption of technology enables new forms of conduct that exploit issues like behavioural bias. As ASIC has found in research, there is variable maturity in how businesses manage AI governance risks. While agentic AI can help people shop around for deals and avoid loyalty penalties, it can also compound risk given its capability to independently plan and act. Cyber-attacks, data breaches and/or inadequate operational resilience and crisis management undermine market confidence and harm consumers Reporting shows increases in hotline calls to the Australian Cyber Security Hotline, incident responses, and threat notifications, reinforcing the need for vigilance and uplift across sectors. Digitisation, legacy systems, reliance on third parties, and evolving threat actor capability continue to elevate cyber risk in ASIC’s view. ASIC is urging directors and financial services license holders to maintain robust risk management frameworks, test their operational resilience and crisis responses, and address vulnerabilities with their third-party service providers. Regulatory gaps related to emerging financial sector participants (digital assets, payments, users of AI) and others on the regulatory perimeter Rapid innovation by or for people unfamiliar with financial services - particularly in digital assets and fintechs - continues to create risks including with unlicensed advice, misleading conduct, and the exploitation of unclear regulatory boundaries. Where a business is currently legitimately unregulated, it is ultimately for government to determine whether a new class of products or services should be brought within a licensing regime. At the same time, some entities will actively seek to remain outside regulation, contributing to perceived regulatory uncertainty. As a result, ensuring clarity on licensing requirements and maintaining effective perimeter oversight will remain priorities for ASIC in 2026. Poor insurance claims handling, particularly following extreme weather events The disasters in Victoria and Queensland in recent weeks underscore the pressures insurers face during concurrent and severe events that can lead to poor consumer outcomes including delays, errors, and poor communications. ASIC has commenced court proceedings concerning serious claim handling failure and will continue to hold the sector to account. The volumes and costs from disasters highlight challenges insurers face, particularly with claims handling. Failure or significant outage resulting from the implementation of CHESS replacement or due to the ongoing use of the aging infrastructure of the current system CHESS is critical national infrastructure that is fundamental to orderly markets. While the first phase of its replacement is due this year, the December 2024 outage provided a real-world example of why that replacement cannot come soon enough. Delays or failures in the CHESS replacement project pose a major risk to market stability, operational resilience, and investor confidence. The risk is heightened by the ongoing reliance on aging technology, which increases the likelihood of technical failures and operational harm. Poor quality financial reporting, sustainability reporting and audit quality Financial reports and audits are key to maintaining market confidence and informed investor and consumer decision making. ASIC is concerned with evidence it has found in superannuation financial reports of inconsistent investment disclosures, limited transparency on certain expenses, and insufficient audit evidence for valuations. As mandatory sustainability/climate reporting expands, there are also risks of misleading or incomplete disclosures. Increased risk appetite in the banking sector in response to competitive pressures that results in consumer harm ASIC notes that historic low net interest margins in banking may be driving parts of the sector towards riskier strategies. ASIC is alert to conduct that pushes regulatory boundaries to circumvent the application of the law that would lead to unfair investor losses and consumer harm. The competitive dynamics at play in Australia could incentivise relaxed credit assessments, larger or unsuitable loans, product changes for lower‑margin customers, and aggressive marketing that steers consumers towards higher‑risk products. For more information about ASIC’s work, see the ASIC Corporate Plan 2025-26.

Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (NYSE:ICE), a leading global provider of technology and data, announced today that Warren Gardiner, CFO, will present at the UBS Financial Services Conference. The presentation will take place on Monday, February 9 at 11:20 a.m. ET. The presentation will be available live and in replay via webcast and can be accessed in the investor relations and media section of ICE’s website at http://ir.theice.com.

CFTC's Weekly Swaps Report has been updated, and is now available: http://www.cftc.gov/MarketReports/SwapsReports/index.htm.Additional information on the Weekly Swaps Report. Archive Explanatory Notes Swaps Report Data Dictionary Release Schedule Released: Weekly on Mondays at 3:30 p.m.

Thank you, Dave [Lynn], for that kind introduction.[1] I appreciate the opportunity to deliver the Alan B. Levenson Keynote Address, named in honor of the former director of the Division of Corporation Finance (Corp Fin). Alan started his service at the Commission during the tenure of Chairman Edward “Ned” Gadsby, who was appointed by President Eisenhower.[2] During his service, the Commission and its staff operated in a very different manner. It is hard to imagine a Corp Fin staff member today questioning a notorious figure such as former Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa in a public hearing—but that is what Alan was able to do. For lawyers involved in capital markets transactions, the annual Securities Regulation Institute organized by the Northwestern School of Law has become an important gathering. For those of us at the SEC, it represents an opportunity to engage with experienced securities law practitioners who can provide valuable feedback needed to develop sound regulatory policies. This is especially true as we revisit our rulebook to promote its effectiveness and reduce compliance burdens where regulatory obligations do not provide commensurate benefits for investors or our markets. The obligation to weigh burdens versus benefits is not a personal preference or philosophy of mine. In fact, it is a legislative mandate. Congress tasked the SEC with this exact objective when it passed the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 (NSMIA).[3] NSMIA directs the Commission to consider whether an action will promote capital formation “whenever we are required to consider the impact of an action upon investor protection pursuant to a rulemaking function.”[4] It is unfortunate that the prior administration downplayed this directive, given the many misguided rulemakings that were proposed and adopted during that period. 1981: The U.S. and The SEC at a Crossroads Efforts to improve capital formation are not new. After all, capital formation drives economic growth, jobs creation, and innovation. The Commission faced a similar task nearly forth-five years ago. Shortly after President Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, the SEC sought to increase capital formation efforts to counter the stagflation and economic malaise of the late 1970s. At the time, Chairman John Shad wrote to James A. Baker, the Chief of Staff to President Reagan, that: “[m]ounting regulatory burdens, rising inflation, corporate and individual taxes, inadequate depreciation allowances, double taxation of dividends, up to 70% taxes on interest and dividends, and one of the highest effective rates of capital gains taxation in the industrialized free world, have been emphatic disincentives to save.”[5] In response to these challenges, the Commission “embarked on a major internal program to facilitate capital formation by simplifying the processes of raising capital in … public markets; by reducing excessive corporate registration, reporting and other regulatory burdens; and by maintaining public confidence in [the] securities markets through effective oversight, disclosure and antifraud enforcement.”[6] These efforts contributed to the resurgence of growth and prosperity—and the rectifying of capital market, monetary, economic and fiscal policy—in the 1980s and beyond. Today, we are pursuing a substantially similar journey. The Commission is considering how it can further enhance America’s capital markets—both qualitatively and quantitively. We cannot take for granted that our capital markets will remain the most attractive, the deepest, and the most liquid in the world. Complacency invites decline. We seek to focus our corporate disclosure rulebook squarely on maintaining the quality and reliability of material information. There are a number of areas where we can potentially enhance our public company disclosure framework that will further empower investment choice, price discovery, and investor protection. Merit or Prudential Regulators We Are Not Before I discuss potential reforms to the Commission’s disclosure regime, let’s remember that there are limits imposed by statute. We are not merit regulators. We do not “approve” offerings.[7] When reviewing registration statements, the staffs of the Divisions of Corporation Finance and Investment Management do not express a view on whether the offering is qualitatively “good” or “bad”—or express any similar judgement as to whether the offering is fair to investors or represents a sound investment decision. The SEC does not—and should not—substitute its judgment for that of investors or market intermediaries. Our framework, as described by renowned lawyer, judge, and early architect of the SEC, Ferdinand Pecora, is simple: “[t]o see it that those who issue securities and offer them for sale to the public, shall first tell the truth and the whole truth to the public with respect to these securities.”[8] There are significant downsides to a system where government regulators make the decision as to whether an investment is appropriate for investors—instead of allowing them to access opportunities that they deem optimal for their own portfolios. In 1980, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts barred the sale of Apple Computer stock as too risky.[9] The basis for denying the application was a regulatory provision, which stipulated that the price per share could not exceed 20 times earnings, while at the time, Apple was offered at 90 times earnings.[10] This decision resulted in Massachusetts investors initially missing out on holding stock in a company that would go on to become one of the most valuable in the technology sector. State blue sky laws, with merit review provisions, existed prior to the enactment of the federal securities law. However, Congress wisely chose a disclosure-based approach to regulation. Thus, the Commission is not charged with administering the Securities Act of 1933 and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 through a merit-review approach. Nor is the Commission a prudential regulator or central economic planner charged with evaluating whether the economy or markets are overheated. The Commission is not responsible for deciding if the financial markets are irrationally exuberant.[11] This is not to suggest that we should not be vigilant in terms of observing market trends and concerns. Rather, the Commission should be focused on the quality of financial reporting, the emergence of fraudulent schemes, and market manipulation. Simply put: our mandate is rooted in disclosure rather than subjective qualitative assessments. We are not supposed to act as “chaperones,” guiding investors to outcomes we think are more prudent. Rather, our primary focus should be on enhancing the quality of the disclosure framework and minimizing the likelihood that offerings have undisclosed material characteristics that would impact pricing. Strengthening Public Company Disclosure Frameworks Regulation S-K[12] is a key pillar of our public company disclosure framework. Many attorneys have spent long hours digesting paragraphs, subparagraphs, and romanettes of Regulation S-K. They have also spent countless hours discerning instructions, guidance, and staff comment letters with respect to the S-K items—aiming to seek clarification of the corresponding provisions—and their clients, by and large, have footed this bill. Some of the Regulation S-K instructions are as complex and lengthy as their corresponding disclosure item. Further complicating matters, in some instances, subparagraphs of Regulation S-K get their own instructions that are also lengthy. For example, the instruction to subparagraph (a) of Item 404 has over thirty discrete paragraphs or subparagraphs![13] As lawyers, we understand the need for precision. However, we should also aim to simplify and streamline our rules where possible. In this spirit, Chairman Paul Atkins has instructed the Division of Corporation Finance to engage in a comprehensive review of Regulation S-K.[14] I strongly support these efforts. There are areas for improvement. For example, with regard to insider trading arrangements and policies under Item 408,[15] we could consider deleting the requirement in subparagraph (b) that mandates companies explain whether they have an insider trading policy or provide reasons if they do not. This would not change any underlying federal securities law obligations or liability thereunder, but would simplify disclosures. Similarly, with regard to transactions with related persons under Item 404,[16] we could consider adjusting the de minimis threshold of $120,000 to a higher amount, which might better align the requirement with materiality considerations. Or we could consider replacing a static number with a more principles-based approach to materiality that has worked well in other contexts. Additionally, the narrative description of company policies under subparagraph (b) could be replaced with a requirement for companies to file their policies or make them readily available on their websites. This would maintain transparency while streamlining SEC filings. In the cybersecurity area, we should re-consider our approach to the current mandated disclosures. We should consider whether Item 106[17] could be streamlined to simplify the narrative disclosures of cybersecurity policies and governance oversight. Our disclosure rules should generally not be the driver for what a company does or does not, but disclosure requirements such as these and others are likely shaming or indirectly compelling companies to change practices rather than eliciting material disclosure as to what the company is doing. There are similar areas for potential improvement in Item 701 and disclosure of unregistered transactions.[18] We could evaluate whether the corresponding Form 10-K item, requiring a 3-year look-back for unregistered sales of securities by the registrant, could be eliminated or otherwise modified. Simplifications could also be made to Item 201 for disclosures of the number of security holders and performance graphs. Perhaps we could delete the five-year graph of the issuer’s total cumulative return compared to a broad index and a line-of-business or peer group index under subparagraph (e). Given the wide availability of evaluative tools on the internet and mobile devices, do investors continue to need such disclosure? And although not squarely within the scope of Regulation S-K, I would be remiss if I did not mention disclosure related to mine safety in Form 10-Q.[19] Surely, we can include such disclosure elsewhere than in a recurring quarterly filing—the most logical place would likely be in Form 8-K or Form SD. One important consideration is that each of these requirements feeds into evaluations under an issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures (“DCPs”), adding one more step in terms of identifying whether any transactions or events are reportable. These are a few examples where we may be able to improve disclosure requirements to ensure they are relevant and efficient in the current regulatory environment. In the aggregate such revisions may reduce compliance burdens, improve our regulatory roadmap and—hopefully, minimize late nights spent by lawyers at public companies having nothing to do with mining but nonetheless wondering if they need DCPs for mine safety incidents. By making these adjustments, we would contribute to a more effective disclosure regulatory regime. Promoting a Scaled Disclosure Rulebook In our efforts to enhance the quality and effectiveness of the SEC rulebook, we should also consider whether it is appropriately tailored and avoids a one-size-fits-all approach. Smaller public companies make significant contributions to the financial markets and the economy more broadly. For context, 50% of all registered equity offerings during the 12-month period ended June 30, 2025 were done by smaller public companies.[20] Some of these investments may provide higher growth opportunities for investors. As such, we should take care to see that our regulations are not disproportionately burdensome on small businesses. One approach is through scaled disclosure for smaller companies. Key concepts such as the “Emerging Growth Company” (“EGC”) and “Smaller Reporting Company” (“SRC”) definitions have important implications for issuers—and can alleviate regulatory burdens while promoting capital formation.[21] Over 40% of companies (42.5%) must comply with the full scope of the Commission’s disclosure requirements.[22] If the Commission were to reduce this number to approximately 20%, the total number of additional companies that would be able to provide scaled disclosure requirements would increase by almost 1,400.[23] From an investor protection standpoint, however, those 20% of the companies still subject to the full scope of our disclosure requirements would represent almost 93.5% of total market public float.[24] Thus, it is important that the threshold definitions for being an EGC or SRC are appropriately calibrated as they will have a direct impact on the scope of applicable regulatory filing obligations. These definitions are not merely academic or administrative—they delineate the corresponding regulatory obligations that a company will face. For instance, SRCs illustrate how investors might expect differing disclosure obligations depending on the size of the company. An established pharmaceutical company with a trillion-dollar market capitalization should not be subject to the same disclosure standards as a biotech company with zero revenues and only one drug candidate in the development pipeline. For the former, there are potentially many Regulation S-K disclosure line items that will provide investors with information material to their investment decisions. For the latter, it is likely that there is primarily one key disclosure that investors are looking to: the milestones and status of the drug’s development. This scaled disclosure is logical given the more limited resources smaller companies frequently operate with. Smaller companies often have limited cash flow and likely have fewer resources than larger entities. Therefore, it is crucial that any regulatory adjustments take into account the circumstances of smaller companies—while maintaining key investor protection features. Instead of layering on additional requirements for all public companies, we should be thinking about whether existing rules could be further refined. The EGC definition is a useful example of how to structure a scaled disclosure framework, and potentially a starting point for right-sizing our rulebook. EGCs benefit from reduced disclosure requirements, which have proven to be beneficial for their development and growth. By providing these companies with a lighter regulatory burden, the EGC definition has facilitated their ability to raise capital while minimizing unnecessary regulatory burdens. This model underscores the importance of tailored regulatory approaches that consider the development stage of companies. There are benefits to being an EGC.[25] Emerging growth companies include less extensive narrative disclosure than other reporting companies, particularly in the description of executive compensation. They can provide audited financial statements for two fiscal years, in contrast to other reporting companies, which must provide audited financial statements for three fiscal years. They also do not include auditor attestation of internal controls over financial reporting under Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 404(b) and are permitted to use test-the-waters communications with qualified institutional buyers and institutional accredited investors. Extending the time periods in which a company is eligible for scaled disclosure may also benefit public markets. Currently, a company generally continues to be an EGC for the first five fiscal years after it completes an IPO.[26] Expanding this time period by several years may yield further growth and investment opportunities. Lastly, expanding the use of Form S-3, which offers a faster and less costly registration process for certain offerings, could further alleviate regulatory challenges for smaller entities. By increasing eligibility for the use of Form S-3, we can provide more flexible options for follow-on offerings. In summary, careful consideration and thoughtful revisions to these definitions can provide growth and innovation for new companies, without imposing unnecessary constraints. By expanding on the success of the EGC model, and appropriately tailoring the disclosure and filing regimes, we can promote a landscape that supports all three elements of our tripartite mission. Reestablish the Focus on Financial Materiality in the SEC Rulebook Finally, the Commission must re-establish its focus on financial materiality in its regulatory regime. During recent years, regulatory agencies have sought to adopt standards based on non-financial social or environmental considerations. Such approaches were fashionable in many circles. Regulatory agencies, however, should strive to adopt standards that are grounded in the statutory authority granted to those agencies and focused on financial materiality. Regulators should aim to adopt neutral standards that are not tied to specific social or political philosophies and objectives and the Commission should not put its thumb on the scale in furtherance of such goals. This is especially true given that there is considerable skepticism as to whether ESG investment strategies yield superior returns. To conclude, I would like to acknowledge the efforts of the SEC staff over the past year. In particular, I would like to recognize Cicely LaMothe, who recently retired after 24 years of SEC. I am particularly grateful that Cicely agreed, when I asked her as the incoming Acting Chairman, if she would pull double duty as acting Corp Fin director in addition to her regular role as deputy director for the disclosure review program. I also would like to thank Corp Fin for loaning out one of their staff members — Gabe Eckstein — who has ably served for the past year as chief of staff to both me and Chairman Paul Atkins. Gabe now returns to Corp Fin as part of the new senior staff recently announced by Corp Fin director Jim Maloney. A year ago at this conference, the new Administration was barely in office. One of my first acts as Acting Chairman was to dispatch SEC staff to start the process of re-engaging with, rather than lecturing to, the corporate legal bar. I appreciate that you have accepted our offer to have a robust discussion of ideas rather than one-way edicts from the government. That conversation needs to continue along with hearing the views of investors. Thank you for your attention today, and thank you to the staff at Northwestern University for organizing this event. I look forward to future engagement on these topics. [1] My remarks today reflect my views as an individual Commissioner and not necessarily the views of the full Commission or my fellow Commissioners. [2] Interview with Alan B. Levenson, SEC Historical Society (Jan. 14, 2003), available at https://www.sechistorical.org/collection/oral-histories/levenson011404Transcript.pdf. [3] National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-290, 110 Stat. 3416 (1996). [4] Id, see also Reports for H.R.3005 H. Rept. 104-622. [5] Chairman John S.R. Shad, The SEC and Capital Formation (July 1981), at 1, available at https://www.sechistorical.org/collection/papers/1980/1981_0717_BakerShadT.pdf. [6] Id. at 2. [7] Investor Alert: Beware of Claims That the SEC Has Approved Offerings (April 30, 2019) available at https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-alerts/investor-alert-beware-claims-sec-has-approved-offerings. [8] Remarks at the “SEC Speaks” Conference 2022, Commissioner Mark T. Uyeda (Sept. 9, 2022) quoting Ferdinand Pecora, available at https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/uyeda-speech-sec-speaks-090922. [9] Richard E. Rustin, Mitchell C. Lynch, Wall Street Journal, Apple Computer Set to Go Public Today; Massachusetts Bars Sale of Stock as Risky (Dec. 12, 1980). [10] Id. [11] Remarks by Chairman Alan Greenspan At the Annual Dinner and Francis Boyer Lecture of The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, D.C. (December 5, 1996) asking “…how do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset values, which then become subject to unexpected and prolonged contractions …,” available at https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/1996/19961205.htm. [12] References to “items” throughout refer to items contained in Regulation S-K. [13] 17 CFR § 229.404, Instructions to Item 404(a). [14] Statement on Reforming Regulation S-K, Paul S. Atkins, Chairman (Jan. 13, 2026) available at https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-statement-reforming-regulation-s-k-011326. [15] 17 CFR § 229.408. [16] 17 CFR § 229.404. [17] 17 CFR § 229.106. [18] 17 CFR § 229.701. [19] 17 CFR § 229.104. [20] SEC Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation, “Staff Report from the Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation Fiscal Year 2025,” at page 53 available at https://www.sec.gov/files/2025-oasb-staff-report.pdf. [21] See Emerging Growth Companies descriptions: https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/going-public/emerging-growth-companies. [22] Data from EDGAR, Calcbench. [23] Id. [24] Id. [25] For background refer to: https://www.sec.gov/resources-small-businesses/going-public/emerging-growth-companies. [26] Id.